Blog

Nutrient timing has been the subject of many research studies, and has always been controversial among athletes, researchers, exercise physiologists, and dietitians. A number of researchers have even made reference to an “anabolic window of opportunity.” The idea behind this “anabolic window” is to try maximizing exercise-induced muscular adaptations and facilitating the repair of damaged tissue [1]. Some researchers even claim that certain nutrient timing can increase fat-free mass [2].

This article will deal with the post-exercise period, which is often considered the most critical part of nutrient timing. In it, I’ll try to analyze if such an “anabolic window” really exists.

Protein Breakdown

One of the biggest claimed benefits of post-workout nutrient timing is the attenuation of muscle protein breakdown.

Spiking insulin levels stop breakdown of muscle protein, not increased amino acid availability. Share on X

While it’s a common belief that muscle protein breakdown inhibition is achieved by increasing amino acid availability, it is actually achieved by spiking insulin levels [3,4]. Although the mechanism by which insulin reduces protein breakdown is not clear, it has been suggested that insulin-mediated phosphorylation of PI3K/Akt inhibits transcriptional activity of the proteolytic Forkhead family of transcription factors, resulting in their sequestration in the sarcoplasm away from their target genes [5]. In addition, down regulation of other aspects of the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway are also believed to play a role in this process [6,20].

Nevertheless, whether benefits truly extend into practice is still questionable; especially when muscle protein breakdown is only slightly elevated immediately following exercise, and then rises rapidly afterward (increasing as much as 50% at the three-hour mark, and elevated proteolysis can persist for up to 24 hours of the post-workout period) [4].

In addition, the effect of increased insulin levels on net muscle protein balance plateaus in the range of 3–4 times normal fasting levels (15-30 mU/L) [6], and this range can be easily reached with the consumption of a typical mixed meal prior to exercise.

For example, one study [7] examined many metabolic effects during the five hours after ingesting a meal containing 75g of carbohydrate, 37g of protein, and 17g of fat. This meal raised insulin three times above fasting levels within half an hour of consumption, five times greater than fasting levels after one hour, and two times greater than fasting levels after five hours.

Another study [8] showed that it took approximately 50 minutes to cause blood amino acid levels to peak after a 45g dose of whey protein isolate was ingested. Insulin concentrations, on the other hand, peaked 40 minutes after ingestion, and remained elevated enough to maximize net muscle protein balance (15-30 mU/L) for approximately two hours.

Thus, the classic post-exercise objective to quickly reverse catabolic processes to promote recovery and growth may only be applicable in the absence of a pre-exercise meal. It remains questionable as to what, if any, positive effects occur with respect to muscle growth from spiking insulin after resistance training.

Protein Synthesis

Another major claimed benefit of post-workout nutrient timing is that it increases muscle protein synthesis. A number of studies have investigated whether this “window” truly exists when it comes to protein synthesis. While evidence from these studies might support the superiority of post-exercise protein intake versus carbohydrate only, or non-caloric placebo [9-13] resulting in the common recommendation to consume protein as soon as possible after a workout [14,15], there is little evidence-based support for this practice. For example, one study [16] showed no significant difference in leg net amino acid balance for six grams of essential amino acids coingested with 35 grams of carbohydrate taken one hour after exercise and then three hours after exercise. In addition, another study [17] also found no significant difference in net protein synthesis between the ingestion of 20 grams of whey immediately before exercise and the same meal consumed one hour after the exercise.

One the other hand, it is important to mention that the opposite results have also been found. For example, one study [18] found that ingestions of essential amino acid and carbohydrate meals led to greater protein synthesis in the post-exercise group as compared to the pre-exercise group. Moreover, another study [19] demonstrated a clear benefit to consuming nutrients as soon as possible after exercise, as opposed to delaying consumption. Protein synthesis of the legs and whole body was increased threefold when the supplement was ingested immediately after exercise, as compared to just 12% when consumption was delayed. However, a limitation of the study was that training involved moderate-intensity, long-duration aerobic exercise. Therefore, the increased fractional synthetic rate was likely due to greater mitochondrial or sarcoplasmic protein fractions, as opposed to the synthesis of contractile elements [4,20].

In conclusion, the available data lacks any indication of an ideal post-exercise timing scheme for maximizing muscle protein synthesis [20].

Muscle Hypertrophy

Many studies [21-27] investigated the effect of post-exercise protein ingestion on muscle hypertrophy. As shown in Figure 1 [20], the results of these trials contradict each other, apparently because of different study designs. For example, many of these studies used both pre- and post-workout supplementation, making it impossible to isolate the impact of post-exercise intake only. Another example is the unmatched protein consumption in the control group. Hence, we are not able to confirm if these positive outcomes were influenced by ingestion timing, or by a larger protein intake throughout the day.

Moreover, some of the studies were conducted early in the morning—a situation that might lead to an overnight fast workout, which can skew the results in favor of the post-exercise feeding groups. Other limitations to these studies might be the use of untrained participants (as muscular adaptations in those without resistance training experience tend to be robust, and do not necessarily reflect gains experienced in trained subjects) and the addition of other supplements (e.g.: creatine) to the participants’ meals, which can create the differences seen between the treatment and control groups.

These confounders emphasise the difficulty in drawing smart conclusions as to the validity of this “anabolic window.”

In addition to these findings, a recent multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials was conducted to determine whether protein timing is a good strategy for enhancing muscle hypertrophy [28]. This analysis comprised 23 studies that included 525 subjects with 47 treatment or control groups. A simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed a small to moderate effect on muscle hypertrophy (Figure 2) [28]. However, in the full meta-regression model, controlling for all covariates (the class of the group, whether or not the groups were protein matched, training status, blinding, gender, age, body mass, and the duration of the study), no significant differences were found between the treatment and control groups (Figure 3) [28]. Moreover, the reduced model was not significantly different from the full model. In addition, with respect to hypertrophy, total protein intake was the strongest predictor of effect size (ES) magnitude.

These results refute the commonly held belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to hypertrophy and indicate that consuming adequate protein in combination with resistance exercise is the key factor for maximizing it.

Strength

The same multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials [28] was also conducted to determine whether protein timing is a good strategy for enhancing strength. The simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed no significant effect found on muscle strength (Figure 4) [28]. In addition, the full meta-regression model, controlling for all covariates (the class of the group, whether or not the groups were protein matched, training status, blinding, gender, age, body mass, and the duration of the study), also found no significant differences between treatment and control for strength, and the reduced model was not significantly different from the full model.

On the other hand, there are a few limitations to this analysis. First, the timing of the meals in the control groups varied significantly from trial to trial. Some studies provided protein as soon as two hours post workout, while others delayed consumption for many hours. Second, the majority of the studies evaluated subjects who were inexperienced with resistance exercise. It is well-established that highly trained individuals respond differently to the demands of resistance training compared with those who lack training experience [28]. In part, this is attributed to a “ceiling effect,” whereby gains in muscle mass become progressively more difficult as a trainee gets closer to his genetic hypertrophic potential.

To conclude, these results refute the belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to increase strength.

Evidence-Based Support of an ‘Anabolic Window’ Is Far from Decisive

This “anabolic window” hypothesis is usually based on the assumption that the athlete is in a fasted state prior to a workout, during which an increase in muscle protein breakdown causes the pre-exercise net negative amino acid balance to persist into the post-exercise period, despite training-induced increases in muscle protein synthesis [4,20]. Thus, if the resistance workout is actually being done after an overnight fast, it would make sense to provide immediate nutrition for the purposes of promoting muscle protein synthesis and reducing proteolysis [20].

If a pre-exercise meal was consumed, this meal can function as both a pre- and post-exercise meal, depending on its size and composition. One study [16] found that ingestion of six grams of essential amino acids (a relatively small amount) immediately before the workout was able to elevate blood and muscle amino acid levels by around 130%, and these elevated levels remained high for two hours after the workout. Other research [17] showed that an intake of 20 grams of whey immediately before the workout caused an elevation in muscular uptake of amino acids of 4.4 times greater than pre-exercise resting levels during the workout.

These findings suggest that even a small to moderate pre-workout protein, taken right before a resistance workout, is enough to sustain amino acid delivery into the post-workout period. Therefore, the next scheduled protein-rich meal (whether it occurs immediately or a few hours after exercise) is likely sufficient for maximizing recovery and anabolism [20].

However, given the fact that the anabolic effect of a meal lasts five to six hours [29], it is worth mentioning that an athlete who might train before lunch or supper—where their last meal was finished five to six hours prior to their workout—should consider a post-exercise protein intake. That is, when a workout is initiated more than five hours after the previous meal, the recommendation to consume protein as soon as possible seems logical.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

References

1. Kerksick, C., T. Harvey, J. Stout, B. Campbell, C. Wilborn, R. Kreider, D. Kalman, T. Ziegenfuss, H. Lopez, J. Landis, J.L. Ivy, and J. Antonio. “International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: Nutrient timing.” J Int Soc Sports Nutr. (2008): 5-17.
2. Ivy, J. and R. Portman. “Nutrient Timing: The Future of Sports Nutrition.” North Bergen, NJ: Basic Health Publications, 2004.
3. Biolo, G., K.D. Tipton, S. Klein, and R.R. Wolfe. “An abundant supply of amino acids enhances the metabolic effect of exercise on muscle protein.” Am J Physiol 273(1 Pt 1) (1997): E122-129.
4. Kumar, V., P. Atherton, K. Smith, and M.J. Rennie. “Human muscle protein synthesis and breakdown during and after exercise.” J Appl Physiol 106(6) (2009): 2026-2039.
5. Kim, D.H., J.Y. Kim, B.P. Yu, and H.Y. Chung. “The activation of NF-kappaB throughAkt-induced FOXO1 phosphorylation during aging and its modulation by calorie restriction.” Biogerontology 9(1) (2008): 33–47.
6. Greenhaff, P.L., L.G. Karagounis, N. Peirce, E.J. Simpson, M. Hazell, R. Layfield, H. Wackerhage, K. Smith, P. Atherton, A. Selby, and M.J. Rennie. “Disassociation between the effects of amino acids and insulin on signaling, ubiquitin ligases, and protein turnover in human muscle.” Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 295(3) (2008): E595–604.
7. Parkin, J.A., M.F. Carey, I.K. Martin, L. Stojanovska, and M.A. Febbraio. “Muscle glycogen storage following prolonged exercise: effect of timing of ingestion of high glycemic index food.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 29(2) (1997): 220-224.
8. Power, O., A. Hallihan, and P. Jakeman. “Human insulinotropic response to oral ingestion of native and hydrolysed whey protein.” Amino Acids 37(2) (2009): 333–339.
9. Tipton, K.D., A.A Ferrando, S.M. Phillips, D. Doyle Jr., and R.R. Wolfe. “Postexercise net protein synthesis in human muscle from orally administered amino acids.” Am J Physiol 276(4 Pt 1) (1999): E628–634.
10. Miller, S.L., K.D. Tipton, D.L. Chinkes, S.E. Wolf, and R.R. Wolfe. “Independent and combined effects of amino acids and glucose after resistance exercise.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 35(3) (2003): 449–455.
11. Borsheim, E., M.G. Cree, K.D. Tipton, T.A. Elliott, A. Aarsland, and R.R. Wolfe. “Effect of carbohydrate intake on net muscle protein synthesis during recovery from resistance exercise.” J Appl Physiol 96(2) (2004): 674–678.
12. Tipton, K.D., T.A. Elliott, M.G. Cree, S.E. Wolf, A.P. Sanford, and R.R. Wolfe. “Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after resistance exercise.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 36(12) (2004): 2073–2081.
13. Tipton, K.D., T.A. Elliott, A.A. Ferrando, A.A. Aarsland, and R.R. Wolfe. “Stimulation of muscle anabolism by resistance exercise and ingestion of leucine plus protein.” Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 34(2) (2009): 151–161.
14. Phillips, S.M. and L.J. Van Loon. “Dietary protein for athletes: from requirements to optimum adaptation.” J Sports Sci. 29(Suppl 1) (2011): S29–38.
15. Phillips, S.M. “The science of muscle hypertrophy: making dietary protein count.” Proc Nutr Soc 70(1) (2011): 100–103.
16. Rasmussen, B.B., K.D. Tipton, S.L. Miller, S.E. Wolf, and R.R. Wolfe. “An oral essential amino acid-carbohydrate supplement enhances muscle protein anabolism after resistance exercise.” J Appl Physiol 88(2) (2000): 386–392.
17. Tipton, K.D., T.A. Elliott, M.G. Cree, A.A. Aarsland, A.P. Sanford, and R.R. Wolfe. “Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion before and after exercise.” Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 292(1) (2007): E71–76.
18. Fujita, S., H.C. Dreyer, M.J. Drummond, E.L. Glynn, E. Volpi, and B.B. Rasmussen. “Essential amino acid and carbohydrate ingestion before resistance exercise does not enhance postexercise muscle protein synthesis.” J Appl Physiol 106(5) (2009): 1730–1739.
19. Levenhagen, D.K., J.D. Gresham, M.G. Carlson, D.J. Maron, M.J. Borel, and P.J. Flakoll. “Postexercise nutrient intake timing in humans is critical to recovery of leg glucose and protein homeostasis.” Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 280(6) (2001): E982–993.
20. Aragon and Schoenfeld. “Nutrient timing revisited: Is there a post-exercise anabolic window?”. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10 (2013): 5.
21. Esmarck, B., J.L. Andersen, S. Olsen, E.A. Richter, M. Mizuno, and M. Kjaer. “Timing of postexercise protein intake is important for muscle hypertrophy with resistance training in elderly humans.” J Physiol 535 (Pt 1) (2001): 301–311.
22. Cribb, P.J. and A. Hayes. “Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise on skeletal muscle hypertrophy.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 38(11) (2006): 1918–1925.
23. Willoughby, D.S., J.R. Stout, and C.D. Wilborn. “Effects of resistance training and protein plus amino acid supplementation on muscle anabolism, mass, and strength.” Amino Acids 32(4) (2007): 467–477.
24. Hulmi, J.J., V. Kovanen, H. Selanne, W.J. Kraemer, K. Hakkinen, and A.A. Mero. “Acute and long-term effects of resistance exercise with or without protein ingestion on muscle hypertrophy and gene expression.” Amino Acids 37(2) (2009): 297–308.
25. Verdijk, L.B., R.A. Jonkers, B.G. Gleeson, M. Beelen, K. Meijer, H.H. Savelberg, W.K. Wodzig, P. Dendale, L.J. van Loon. “Protein supplementation before and after exercise does not further augment skeletal muscle hypertrophy after resistance training in elderly men.” Am J Clin Nutr 89(2) (2009): 608–616.
26. Hoffman, J.R., N.A. Ratamess, C.P. Tranchina, S.L. Rashti, J. Kang, and A.D. Faigenbaum. “Effect of protein-supplement timing on strength, power, and bodycomposition changes in resistance-trained men.” Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 19(2) (2009): 172–185.
27. Erskine, R.M., G. Fletcher, B. Hanson, and J.P. Folland. “Whey protein does not enhance the adaptations to elbow flexor resistance training.” Med SciSports Exerc 44(9) (2012): 1791-1800.
28. Schoenfeld, et al. “The effect of protein timing on muscle strength and hypertrophy: A meta-analysis.” Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10 (2013): 5.
29. Layman, D.K. “Protein quantity and quality at levels above the RDA improves adult weight loss.” J Am Coll Nutr 23(6 Suppl) (2004): 631S–636S.

Athletes of any sport can benefit by using eccentric loading techniques in their traditional strength training programs. Eccentric training, which has been underused and undervalued, produces and improves factors that affect strength, power, running economy, and injury prevention.

Eccentric contractions occur when muscles extend, or lengthen, while producing force. This muscle action yields greater force levels, up to 20-60% greater than concentric motions, with subsequent heightened neuromuscular activation levels (Mike, Kerksick, and Kravitz, 2015).

Higher strength activity relates to muscle elasticity and the stretch-shortening cycle that occurs with eccentric contractions (Wirth, Keiner, Szilvas, Hartman, and Sander, 2015). Muscles contract eccentrically during deceleration activities such as downhill running, jump landings, and other forms of impact absorption while strength training (Maciejczyk, Wiecek, Szymura, Ochalek, Szygula, Kepinska, and Pokrywka, 2015).

Eccentric exercises done with supramaximal loads primarily induces neural adaptation while submaximal loading elicits hypertrophic effects. The use of one over the other depends on the individual athlete’s needs (Wirth et al., 2015).

Eccentric loading causes adaptation in both concentric-only and eccentric-only strength movements. Share on X

Interestingly, eccentric loading allows for positive adaptation in both concentric-only and eccentric-only strength movements (Mike et al., 2015). Eccentric exercise improves various aspects of athletic development, including anaerobic power, acceleration, endurance, and maximum strength. Examining these parameters through literature helps us to understand how eccentric resistance training can directly affect each variable.

The Benefits

One study found that three weeks of eccentric training combined with overspeed training enhanced power and running speed in trained athletes (Cook, Beaven, and Kilduff, 2013). Eccentric exercises improved aspects of muscular power while overspeed training directly influenced velocity.

In the Cook study, the following training groups were compared for performance outcomes on speed and power: traditional resistance training, eccentric-only activity, traditional resistance training plus overspeed training, and eccentric-only plus overspeed training. The researchers tested twenty semiprofessional rugby players for changes in strength, power, and speed after they consecutively performed four counterbalanced three-week training blocks.

The traditional program called for two lower body and two upper body sessions per week. The eccentric-only program was set up in the same manner except the players only performed the eccentric movement, and spotters returned the weight to the rack between every repetition. Band-assisted sprints and vertical jumps were used for overspeed training.

The researchers discovered that eccentric-only training elicited greater hypertrophy and strength effects for both upper and lower body training. Adding overspeed training, which accentuates the eccentric loading on the lower body, elicited the greatest performance enhancements, specifically peak power in the countermovement jump.

No change in maximal speed was observed from the eccentric-only group. When combined with overspeed training, however, the players did produce gains in speed. For practical application, the researchers recommended focusing on both force adaptation and movement velocity to produce the best possible training outcomes.

A separate study by Wirth et al. (2015) examined the effects of eccentric training on lower body maximal strength and speed-strength (power) in untrained subjects. The training group performed three lower body strength sessions each week for six weeks using a 45-degree unilateral leg press. This group was compared to a control group which did not do the training.

Eccentric maximum strength, traditional eccentric-to-concentric 1-rep maximum, maximum voluntary contraction, and vertical jump performance were evaluated at both the beginning and end of the training period. At the end of the six weeks, eccentric strength improved by 28.2% and absolute strength by 31.1%. No significant change was seen in the speed-strength motor components of the vertical jump and force contraction tests.

The Wirth study supports the Cook study in that eccentric training alone elicited strength gains, but supplemental training may be required to target specific power adaptations.

In cycling, athletes with greater lower body lean muscle mass tend to have a ~4-9% increase in mean power maximum per kilogram of lean mass (Mujika, Ronnestad, and Martin, 2016). The main concern with incorporating strength training, specifically heavy sets, is the fear of adding unnecessary bulk to the muscles which would hinder performance.

The research shows, however, that heavy weight eccentric training paired with relatively high-volume endurance training makes the bulking adaptation physiologically impossible (Mujika et al., 2016). While some studies have found a slight increase in muscle hypertrophy (2-4%), there was no increase in total body mass in trained cyclists (Mujika et al., 2016).

Since cycling is a concentrically-dominant sport, why incorporate eccentric activity at all? Because one form of endurance training that specifically targets the eccentric component of a cyclist’s movement pattern involves inverse dynamics (focus on the ‘pull’ component). This allows the knee and hip joints to absorb most of the cycling power through each rotation (Mujika et al., 2015).

This type of training is gaining much attention not only for its positive effects on power development but also its effects on rehabilitation and injury prevention (Mujika et al., 2015). Sport-specific training focuses exclusively on maximal concentric movements, but overuse studies remind us how important it is to train the opposable, antagonistic movements for well-rounded strength adaptations and decreased likelihood of injury.

Implementation

The question remains–how do we safely incorporate this type of training into an athlete’s program? Program design is important to any athlete’s performance success from a long-term perspective. Educated strength and conditioning professionals decide how and when to incorporate this type of activity.

In a study by Maciejczyk et al. (2015), healthy, active individuals participated in a 60-minute downhill running test at a -10% grade as well as a 20-second maximum cycling sprint test. The researchers studied the effect on anaerobic power, starting speed, and anaerobic endurance.

Eccentric exercise caused a significant decrease in peak power for at least twenty-four hours after the test but had no effect on starting speed or anaerobic endurance. This power decrease should be taken into account when planning sessions that require quality power output.

Execution

A recent paper by Mike et al. (2015) described methods to include eccentric training in a resistance program. Eccentric movements are performed in a slow and controlled manner, typically lasting 3-5 seconds when the eccentric component is emphasized or even up to 8-10 seconds for exclusively eccentric movements. The sets and reps will depend on the desired outcome. Typically 3-5 sets of each exercise are performed with 6-8 reps for a strength focus or 8-10 reps for a hypertrophic/power focus. Higher velocity options are also available but are only appropriate for advanced athletes.

The authors offered several ways to perform eccentrics as part of a resistance training program. The 2/1 technique involves lifting the weight with two limbs through the concentric phase and using only one limb for the eccentric phase. The typical load is 70% of the concentric 1-rep maximum.

For a super slow technique, a 60% maximum load typically is lifted through the eccentric phase for 10-12 seconds. Another technique suitable for advanced athletes is the two-movement technique where 90-110% of maximal load is lifted through a compound, multi-joint movement and ended with an isolation exercise for the eccentric finish. For example, performing a concentric dumbbell bench into an eccentric dumbbell fly.

The negative, or supermax, technique requires at least one spotter for correct execution. In this lift, the athlete does not perform the concentric movement. Instead, a supramaximal weight 110-130% of maximum is lifted eccentrically through one repetition for 3-10 sets with spotters resetting the weight between each repetition.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

References

Cook, Christian J., Martyn C. Beaven, and Liam P. Kilduff. “Three Weeks of Eccentric Training Combined with Overspeed Exercises Enhanced Power and Running Speed Performance Gains in Trained Athletes.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 27(5) (2013): 1280-1286. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182679278.

Maciejczyk, M, M. Wiecek, J. Szymura, K. Ochalek, Z. Szygula, M. Kepinska, and A. Pokrywka. “Effects of Eccentric Exercise on Anaerobic Power, Starting Speed, and Anaerobic Endurance.” Kinesiology 47(1) (2015): 44-50.

Mike, Jonathan, Chad M.Kerksick, and Len Kravitz. “How to Incorporate Eccentric Training Into a Resistance Training Program.” Strength and Conditioning Journal 37(1) (2015): 5-17. doi: 10.1519/SSC.0000000000000114.

Mujika, Innigo, Bent R. Ronnestad, and David T. Martin. “Effects of Increased Muscle Strength and Muscle Mass on Endurance-Cycling Performance.” International Journal of Sports Physiology & Performance 11(3) (2016): 283-289. doi: 10.1123/IJSPP.2015-0405.

Wirth, Klaus, Michael Keiner, Elena Szilvas, Hagen Hartmann, and Andre Sander. “Effects of Eccentric Strength Training on Different Maximal Strength and Speed-Strength Parameters of the Lower Extremity. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 29(7) (2015): 1837-1845. doi: 0.1519/JSC.0000000000000528.

The sprinting and jumping events in Track and Field are dynamic activities that require great speed, strength, power, coordination, and control. Athletes can reach speeds in excess of 12 m/s during the 100 meters and in some cases over 11m/s prior to takeoff during the horizontal jumps. Tables 1 and 2 below illustrate the speed and force requirements of these events.

Speed is the single most important quality. In order to develop speed, you have to generate force and impulse against the ground (horizontal or vertical). As a training stimulus, the athlete ultimately needs to develop higher levels of force at higher velocities and in less time. Essentially, this means training across the force–velocity spectrum to target different mechanisms that influence overall athletic development. This combination of force and velocity training is often regarded as power training. Different aspects of the events require specific characteristics of power that, in turn, require specialized training stimulus. Power is not simply a single expressive ability, but is instead the sum of several different competencies.

Understanding the exact event requirements and characteristics of strength and power is essential for designing effective training programs. Specifically, research performed on the force/velocity curve has shaped many of the practices we follow today. We know that maximum power output is obtained when a particular combination of force and velocity is demonstrated. This notion has led us to develop training strategies focusing on two distinct areas: a) force output with no time restraints; and b) force output with time restraints. The combination of these methods constitutes common ground among many of today’s leading experts.

The sprinting and jumping events utilize extremely specialized force/velocity requirements. The limiting factors lie in the neural and muscle-tendon capabilities for producing maximum force in minimum time. Therefore, it is the velocity component of applied force that requires specific attention in the training program. As power potential is determined to a high degree by maximum strength levels, it would be irresponsible to suggest that developing high velocity force in isolation will produce long-lasting improvements in overall power output. Likewise, an increase in maximum strength will not automatically improve power’s velocity component. This means that we must take a closer look at traditional power training methods to ensure their effectiveness when developing the qualities of sprinters and jumpers.

Traditional Methods of Power Development

When accelerating to develop high horizontal speeds or when generating vertical speed in the take-off phase of the jumps, an athlete creates impulse against the ground. This requires athletes to generate large forces in a limited amount of time (as outlined in Tables 1 and 2). Strength and conditioning specialists often refer to this quality either as Power or exhibiting high Rate of Force Development (RFD). These terms are often used interchangeably, but they are subtly different. We will try to differentiate between these terms here and give them some context.

Power is defined as the rate of performing work.

Power = (Work Done) / Time

as Work Done = Force x Displacement,

Power = (Force x Displacement) / Time

Therefore,

Power = Force x Velocity, or Power = RFD x Displacement.

When in contact with the ground, the athlete generates power by developing high levels of force in short duration (RFD) and displacing his/her center of mass through an appropriate range. For any given athlete performing a dynamic movement where the center of mass is being displaced, these terms may be used interchangeably. However, in isometric contractions where there is no displacement then there will be high levels of RFD but zero power. This is worth bearing in mind when considering different types of muscle contraction and various training modalities with respect to force application and movement velocity.

Jump and power development often incorporates combinations and variations of maximum strength protocols (some of which may be isometric), ballistic training methods, and plyometrics. We will take a closer look at each of these components.

Maximum Strength

Maximum strength development is an important foundation for power output improvement. Strength is the capacity of the skeletal muscle to produce force and a given velocity. Maximum strength is enhanced through the use of weightlifting exercises using heavy loads of 90-100% of the 1 Rep Max (1RM). Dynamic exercises such as Olympic weightlifting variations performed at such loads develop explosive strength qualities such as maximum RFD. Isometric contractions and less dynamic exercises such as squatting target high levels of muscle fiber recruitment, where contraction velocities are high but movement speed is low. These qualities are required to overcome inertia and are key characteristics for starting strength. However, the takeoff velocities seen in jumping events and during maximum velocity sprinting require not only high levels of recruitment, but also high speeds of contraction. Such neural activation is highly correlated with improvements in fast force production.

Another possible drawback of maximum strength development is that selective fiber recruitment is not possible, due to the low velocity component related with this method. Maximum strength development requires the recruitment of both slow (type 1) and fast (type 2) muscle fibers, and is not recommended in isolation for long periods of the training year. As a result, other forms of power development are more suited for high-end speed/power athletes.

Ballistic Training

The velocity and reactive components of power are the most difficult to adapt through training. Special training targeting these abilities needs to be a constant throughout the training program. This means that, from Week One of preparation, the athlete must be exposed to specific stimuli that develop high-speed neuromuscular qualities. Performing explosive weightlifting and medicine ball exercises is a major advantage for this reason, with an athlete training at maximum intensity with loads of 10-50% of the 1RM to enable selective recruitment of fast twist muscles fibers and enhanced muscular firing rates. Exercises including weighted jumps, Olympic weightlifting movements, and implement throwing are excellent methods of developing specific strength with a velocity focus.

Reactive Strength

The most specific quality needed is reactive strength. Force application in the sprinting and jumping events can be characterized by a rapid eccentric muscle action followed by a concentric muscle action. This can also be described as a muscular stretching phase followed by a muscular shortening phase, otherwise known as the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC). An efficient SSC is characteristic of the fastest human movements.

Stretch-shortening cycles are present in every muscle within our body. There are many stretch-shortening processes occurring during every sprint stride and takeoff action. A single jump in a vertical plane consists of stretch-shortening cycles within the core musculature, hips, quadriceps, hamstrings, glutes, gastrocnemius, and so on. Priority when training for reactive strength is placed on the stretch reflex capabilities of the lower limbs and core as they primarily influence the ability to sprint and jump.

We aim to achieve several distinct outcomes during the ground contact phase. Ideally, ground contact time is short, horizontal and vertical impulses are high, and the breaking forces are low. There are several factors at play that must be addressed via the development of reactive strength. Muscles and tendons are designed to store and release energy during fast pre-stretches and subsequent shortening muscle-tendon actions. Tendons are considerably better at storing energy than muscles. In particular, the Achilles tendon is an essential target of all lower body plyometric activities.

Traditional plyometric training enhances the stretch reflex mechanism, increases tendon stiffness, and targets the velocity component of rate of force development. The length and stiffness properties of tendons play a critical role in the high velocity force capabilities of the stretch reflex mechanism. Repetitive stiffness jumps, depth jump variations, and bounding exercises are popular methods of plyometric training. Focus during such activities should be placed on the pretension prior to ground contact and the speed of the stretch reflex.

Training methods aim to overload certain structures to produce greater training effects. While overloading strategies for developing low velocity power are obvious, it is not so obvious how to overload the other end of the spectrum. While the most intense variations of plyometric exercises provide overload regarding impact forces and stretch reflex, they are not able to minimizing contact times beyond what is naturally possible. It is therefore important to understand that overloading the velocity component, and specifically the time programs within the neuromuscular system, is not possible during traditional means of training. The use of an external support system that facilitates ground contact times and concentric muscle actions provides an opportunity to target such time programs.

Assisted Jumps and Overspeed Training

The purpose of assisted jumps training is to expose the central nervous system to faster time programs stored with the muscle-tendon systems. Assisted jumps training requires an external support system in the form of an overhead bungee cord or elastic bands. The athlete is attached to the overhead bungee and their body weight is strategically decreased while they perform various plyometric exercises. These conditions make it possible to achieve such shortened muscular firing rates, ground contact times, and time programs within the central nervous system. Assisted jumps training can be comparable to a more commonly used speed development method called overspeed training.

Overspeed training for sprinting elicits similar neural and muscular responses to those found with high-velocity jump training. The premise behind overspeed sprinting is that having an athlete sprint at supramaximal velocities will enhance CNS firing rates, reduce the inhibitory mechanism within the neuromuscular system, and increase stride frequency. Overspeed training enables an athlete to experience sprinting speeds and reduced ground contact times not otherwise possible via traditional means.

Commonly used methods of overspeed training include downhill sprinting and sprinting while being pulled by a bungee cord device. As with assisted jumps training, it is suggested that overspeed training enhances timing mechanisms and creates new motor programs. A variety of studies have found that overspeed has both an acute and chronic effect on increased horizontal velocity.

Assisted Jumps Training Research

Assisted jumps training is far from a novel concept. Its use can be traced back to the 1970s, and perhaps even earlier. However, very little research and practical application of the method has been performed. Before discussing specific programming concepts, we will talk about some of the relevant research on the topic.

Giovanni Cavagna was the first to study the effects of assisted jumping. In a study for Aerospace Medicine in 1972, he demonstrated that jumping in low-gravity conditions (using a suspension device) decreased time of force production as compared to normal jumping conditions. Subjects using the assisted device demonstrated force output similar to that of non-suspended subjects, but in reduced time.

Yu Imachi of Japan emerged as the pioneer in the research of assisted jumps training. In an early study, 20 male high school volleyball players were divided into three training groups and tested on their vertical jump height. After a 10-week training period, the assisted jumps training groups using protocols of minus 10% and minus 20% body weight had improved vertical jump performance significantly greater than that shown by participants in the group performing plyometric training under normal conditions. Each subject performed 10 maximal effort vertical jumps with 15 seconds of rest between each jump, three times per week. A similar study was performed using female athletes and showed similar results.

In a more recent study, Imachi compared takeoff velocities and force production of assisted jumping with that of free jumping exercises. The results indicated that assisted jumps training did not improve the maximal force production of the athletes. Instead, the improved jumping ability was a result of greater takeoff velocity.

Brazilian jumps specialist Nelio Moura is perhaps the best-known contemporary proponent of assisted jumps training. Although little is known about his protocols for using the method, there are several videos of Olympic champion long jumper Irving Saladino using the device in training. I have had several email conversations with Nelio regarding the method and he mentioned that he uses it all year and with athletes of all age groups. Nelio has had incredible success over a long time span and we should highly respect his opinion on such training.

Programming Assisted Jumps Training

When performing assisted jumps, it is important to realize that the increased jump height is not an acute effect, as you are being assisted by elastic energy. Let us address how ‘reducing’ body weight works in reality. It is true to say that the stretch–recoil from the bungee will indeed lead to greater vertical displacement of your center of mass. Consequently, during the landing phase of each jump you will experience a greater stimulus for increased forces (and thereby passive eccentric loading), which is initially directed in the Achilles tendon. Following this, the bungee will progressively develop tension and dampen the loading around the knees and hips as they respond to the greater landing forces.

This “assistance” means that the knees and hips do not flex excessively and are able to develop sufficient eccentric musculotendinous loading to promote a faster coupling time and maintain a respectable ground contact time. This moderate amount of damping through the knees may allow you to more safely perform repetitions with reduced risk of jumpers’ knee. Over the course of a training phase you will adapt to increased passive landing forces (but undoubtedly still lower than actual impact forces in the long, triple and high jumps), while still generating high (but not excessive) eccentric loads in the Achilles and Patellar tendons. This gives the stretch reflexes the sensation of an appropriate level of overload and fast coupling time into the concentric phase.

Successful training programs must adhere to a combination of principles relating to readiness and response. It is therefore impossible to single out a particular training method or exercise protocol when determining performance improvements. However, based on research and case studies performed by ourselves and other jumps and sprint coaches, we can confidently state that Assisted Jumps Training is a method that fits naturally within the scheme of a program. It can be programmed much like other highly intense plyometric exercises.

Due to the velocity component, it is best grouped with maximum velocity development such as fly sprints or activities of that nature. We recommend implementing the method after the athlete’s general preparation phase and using it throughout the competitive season. The neural demands make it a potential primer exercise during competition weeks; however, we would reduce volume considerably during this time. Potential exercise choice is limited to those in a vertical plane; otherwise, regular plyometric choices can be utilized.

Logistics and the Assisted Jumps Device

If you are considering making your own assisted jumps device, the most important factor is the ability to adjust the bungee cord tension. Different athletes will require slightly different adjustment settings when trying to achieve a specific reduction in body weight. We have used devices that are attached to a pulley system on a wall that can be easily adjusted. Although this is a great setup, it is only practical if you plan on creating a semi-immovable device and have a permanent space for it.

The parts needed for a device similar to this include a basic bungee cord, a belay system, a carabineer, a rope, and a harness. We recommend the device that we currently use, which is very simple and almost made specifically for this purpose. This assisted pull-up device, found in a local sports store, is easily moveable and very simple in design. Simply attach a harness and it works perfectly as an assisted jumps training device.

It’s Time to Add Assisted Jumps Training to Your Training Program

Heavy resistance training develops muscular strength and rate of force development properties that can increase the potential for power production. Plyometric and ballistic training impact the velocity component and the efficiency of the stretch-shortening cycle. Assisted jumps training is able to create new time programs with the central nervous system enhancing fire rates and other intramuscular coordination qualities. Understandably, research on assisted jumps training has been very limited up to this point. While we find great value in case studies, we also understand their limitations. However, from the findings we do have, it seems safe to assume that optimal training for speed and power should incorporate all three of these training methods.

To date, the positive findings appear consistent and should lead to enough interest for coaches to implement this method into their training program—at the very least, for the sake of variety. Successful training methodologies often share similar, if not identical, characteristics. These include characteristics such as intensity, specificity, overload, heavy, light, slow, fast, short or long recovery, etc. Coaches understand exactly where these fit into their plan and there is little argument over their place. We program many facets of the training program across a wide spectrum, from non-specific to specific, slow and heavy to light and fast, static to dynamic, simple to complex, and more. We understand the need for variety and progression and, for the most part, we understand how the different training methods promote specific adaptation.

The discussion of strength development will always be a favorite pastime of coaches, but the speed and velocity components of movement and technical application clearly serve a far greater importance. With that being said, it is surprising that assisted jumps training and overspeed sprinting are not more widely used. If your reasoning is that it’s a time and logistics issue, that’s a poor excuse.

Assisted jumps training truly doesn’t require expensive equipment or fancy devices, and almost all facilities have the necessary space and ceiling requirements. Perhaps the reason for its exclusion is a lack of awareness. If you are obsessed with jump development, you will leave no stone unturned in your pursuit of higher heights and farther distances. We hope that this article will inspire you to at least research further and experiment, in the way that most training methods began their journey to acceptance and normalcy. Good luck!

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

Nick Newman, MS, CSCC
Nick is the current Director of Scholastic Training at Athletic Lab in Cary, North Carolina. Before joining the Athletic Lab team, Nick dedicated 10 years to the study and application of the development of athletes ranging from pre-adolescent youth to the professional ranks. Nick earned his bachelor’s degree in Exercise Science from Manhattan College and later earned a master’s degree in Human Performance and Sport Psychology from California State University, Fullerton. Nick is a jumps and sprints specialist and, in 2012, he published his highly acclaimed book, The Horizontal Jumps: Planning for Long Term Development, which has been endorsed by several world-class speed and power coaches. Nick prides himself on his ability to teach and relate to athletes of all ages and levels. His passion and expertise in athletic development is second to none. Nick is a Certified Strength and Conditioning Coach, a certified Track and Field Technical Coach with the USTFCCCA, and a Sports Performance Coach with USA Weightlifting.

Dr Phil Graham-Smith, BSc, Phd, CSCS, CSci, FBASES
Phil is currently the Head of Biomechanics at the Aspire Academy of Sporting Excellence in Doha, Qatar. In addition to his academic career at Liverpool John Moores University and the Univerity of Salford, he was also the consultant Head of Biomechanics at the English Institute of Sport. He is an Accredited Sports Biomechanist and Fellow of BASES, a BOA registered Performance Analyst, and a Certified Strength & Conditioning Specialist (NSCA). He has over 25 years applied experience providing biomechanical support to UK Athletics, Aspire, and Qatar athletes and professional football and rugby clubs. His is also co-founder of ForceDecks, an intuitive system designed for strength, power, and asymmetry diagnostics in professional sport.

References

1. Adams, K., J. O’Shea, K. O’Shea, and M. Climstein. “The effect of six weeks of squat, plyometric and squat-plyometric training on power production.” J Strength and Cond Res 6 (1992): 36-41.
2. Andersen, J.L., P. Schjerling, and B. Saltin. “Muscle, Genes and Athletic Performance.” Scientific American 283, no. 3 (2000): 30-37.
3. Behm, D.G. “Neuromuscular implications and applications of resistance training.” J Strength and Cond Res 9, no. 4 (1995): 264-274.
4. Bosco, C. “Adaptive response of human skeletal muscle to simulated hypergravity condition.” Acta Physiol. Scand. 124, no. 4 (1985b) 507-513.
5. Bosco, C. “Stretch-shortening cycle in skeletal muscle function and physiological consideration of explosive power in man.”
6. Cavagna, G.A. “Storage and utilization of elastic energy in skeletal muscle.” Exerc. Sports Sci. Review 5 (1977): 89-129.
7. Cavagna, G.A., A. Zamboni, T. Faraggiana, and R. Margaria. “Jumping on the Moon: Power Output at Different Gravity Values.” Aerospace Med 43, no. 4 (1972): 408-414.
8. Corn, R.J., and D. Knudson. “Effect of elastic-cord towing on the kinematics of the acceleration phase of sprinting.” J. Strength Cond Res 17, no. 1 (2003):72–75.
9. Costello, F. “Training for speed using resisted and assisted methods.” Nat Strength Cond Assoc J 7 (1985): 74–75.
10. Ebben, W.P. “Complex Training: A Brief Review.” J Sports Sci and Med 1 (2002): 42-46.
11. Ebben, W.P., J.A. Davies, and R.W. Clewien. “Effect of the degree of hill slope on acute downhill running velocity and acceleration.” J Strength Cond Res 00 (2008): 1-5.
12. Gambetta, V. “Maximal Power Training.” Tack Coach 145 (1998): 4630-4632.
13. Gambetta, V. “New trends in training theory.” New Studies in Athletics 4, no. 3 (1989): 7-10.
14. Garhammer, J.J. “A review of the power output studies of Olympic and powerlifting: Methodology, performance prediction and evaluation tests.” J Strength Cond Res 7 (1993): 76-89.
15. Hakkinen, K. and P.V. Komi. “Changes in electrical and mechanical behaviour of leg extensor muscle during heavy resistance strength training.” Scand J Sports Sci 7 (1985a): 55-64.
16. Hakkinen, K. “Neuromuscular adaptation during strength training, aging, detraining and immobilization.” Critical Reviews in Phys Rehab Med 6, no. 3 (1994): 161-198.
17. Imachi, I., S. Sasayama, and M. Man-I. “The Effect of suspension training in developing vertical jumping ability.” J.J. Phys. Fit. Sports Med 43, no. 6 (1994): 703.
18. Imachi, I., S. Sasayama, T. Yamashita, K. Yagi, K. Imachi, S. Yoshida, and M. Man-I. “Developing take off velocity in ski jumping through reduced- resistance training.” Abs. Intn’l Cong. Ski Sci 1 (1995): 324-327.
19. Imachi, I., S. Sasayama, T. Yoshida, and T.O. Watanabe. “The effect of suspension training in developing vertical jumping ability.” Proc. ICHPER Wld. Cong 38 (1996): 91-92.
20. Jones, K., G. Hunter, G. Fleisig, R. Escamilla, and L. Lemak. “The effects of compensatory acceleration on the development of strength and power.” J Strength Cond Res 13 (1999): 99-105.
21. Komi, P.V. and K. Hakkinen. “Strength and Power,” in The Olympic Book of Sports Medicine, ed. A. Dirix et al. (London: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1988).
22. Krammer, W. J. and R.U. Newton. “Training for improved vertical jump.” Sports Science Exchange 7, no. 6 (1994).
23. Lundin, P. “A review of plyometric training.” NSCA J. 7, no. 3 (1985): 69-74.
24. Lyttle, A., G. Wilson, and K. Ostrowski. “Enhancing performance: Maximal power versus combined weights and plyometrics training.” J Strength Cond Res 10, no. 3 (1996): 173-179.
25. Markovic, G. and J. Slobonan. “Positive and Negative Loading and Mechanical Output in Maximum Vertical Jumping.” Med Sci Sports & Ex 39, no. 10 (2007): 1757-1764.
26. McBride, J.M., T.T. Triplett-McBride, A. Davie, and R.U. Newton. “The effect of heavy vs. light load jump squats on the development of strength, power and speed.” J Strength Cond Res 16 (2002): 75-82.
27. McBride, J.M., T.T. Triplett-McBride, A. Davis, and R.U. Newton. “A comparison of strength and power characteristics between power lifters, Olympic lifters and sprinters.” J Strength Cond Res 13 (1999): 58-66.
28. Moir, G., R. Sanders, C. Button, and M. Glaister. “The Influence of Familiarization on the Reliability of Force Variables Measured during Unloaded and Loaded Vertical Jumps.” J Strength Cond Res 19, no. 1 (2005): 140-145.
29. Paradisis, GP and C. Cooke. “The effects of sprint running on sloping surfaces.” J Strength Cond Res 20 (2006): 767–777.
30. Ritzdorf, W. “Strength and power training in sport,” in Training in Sport: Applying Sport Science, ed. B. Elliott. (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 1998).
31. Ross, A., M. Leveritt, and S. Riek. “Neural Influences on Sprint Running.” Sports Med 31 (2001): 409-425.
32. Ross, A.C., A. L. Bryant, and C. L. Bryant. “The acute effects of a single set of contrast preloading on a loaded countermovement jump training session.” J Strength Cond Res 20 (2006): 162-166.
33. Sale, D.G. “Neural Adaptation to Strength Training,” in Strength and Power in Sport, ed. P.V. Komi. (Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1992).
34. Siff, M. “Biomechanical foundations of strength and power training,” in Biomech Sport London, ed. V. Zatsiorsky. (Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Ltd., 2001), 103-139.
35. Stone, M.H., S. Plisk and D. Collins. “Training Principle: Evaluation of modes and methods of resistance training – A coaching perspective.” Sport Biomechanics 1, no. 1 (2001).
36. Verkhoshansky, Y.V. and M.C. Siff. Supertraining, trans. M. Yessis (Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand, 1998).
37. Vitasalo J.T. and P.V. Komi. “Interrelationships between electromyographic, mechanical, muscle structure and reflex time measurements in man.” Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 111 (1981): 97-103.
38. Wilson, G.J., R. U. Newton, A. J. Murphy, and B.J. Humphries. “The optimal training load for the development of dynamic athletic performance.” Med Sci Sport Ex 25 (1993): 1279-1286.
39. Zatsiorsky, V.M. “Science and Practice of Strength Training.” Human Kinetics Publishers, 1995.

One Coach’s Glimpse into the Insights of Dr. Andy Franklyn-Miller

When we were all just babes in the coaching world, we probably uttered the same two words we often heard our prominent elders using to describe lower leg pain in runners: shin splints. Even if we didn’t know exactly how to explain a shin splint, we knew what it caused—the kind of pain in the front of the lower leg that, when you pressed on the specific hot point, sent runners to the roof tops. For most of us, whatever we chose to call that kind of pain, we still weren’t coming any closer to resolving it.

The riddle: When is a shin splint not a shin splint?
The answer: When it’s a stress fracture.

And a good response to this riddle might be: If the end result is basically the same—a runner out for a length of time while the healing takes place—what’s the difference, anyway?

My Son’s Experience with Shin Pain Therapies

My son was hampered throughout his prep sports career by nagging shin pain. Of course, I tried everything that sports medicine specialists and trainers were advocating. One diagnosis was that tight calf muscles were preventing him from dorsiflexing his feet. The suggested remedy was calf stretching, but it didn’t work.

Another theory was high stress of the soleus muscle at its attachment point. The problem may have been inflexible football cleats. The advice? Try different cleats. It didn’t work.

The next theory was too much shock on the lower leg bones as a result of landing a thousand times per mile with forces up to three and a half times his body weight. Additionally, he appeared to have excessive pronation. The remedy was custom orthotics, at $600 a pair. We had to buy two pairs because he outgrew the first pair. They didn’t work.

The next approach was to strengthen the lower leg muscles. To do this, we used things like the D.A.R.D. (Dynamic Axial Resistance Device), and thera-bands in every color of the spectrum. Neither of these resistance protocols helped.

Still other PTs suggested that the way to attack the problem was through stretching, acupuncture (which many now refer to as dry needling), TENS, and aggressive immobilization. Most of these treatments made little sense to me.

The last theory was the most controversial, even at that time: anterior compartment syndrome—super snug fascia resisting blood flow during running. This was our last resort. Depending on the results of the pressure test, the possible remedy was a fasciotomy. I never really considered this an option, but he did have the pressure test, and it showed only marginally elevated pressure in one of the four compartments tested.

The only therapy that did work was weekly visits to a massage therapist who had once treated Bulls guard Scottie Pippen’s nagging back problems. Those massages got him from one football game to the next and one track meet to the next. They were expensive sessions, but cheaper than a trip to the psychiatrist, which both dad and son had been contemplating.

The Problem Might Not Originate in the Foot

My only original thought after the failure of all conventional approaches was that the problem might not be necessarily related to something within the foot itself. Why was I so certain of this? Back in 1997, when he came to my high school track to run exhibition in both the 100 and 200 meter dashes, World Paralympic sprint champion Tony Volpentest mentioned that he occasionally experienced shin splints. This was really interesting because Tony was born without feet.

There had to be something about the lower leg activity—or over-activity—that created the problem. I should have given more thought to this, but I didn’t.

The Answer to Shin Splints Is in the Mechanics

The answer to the riddle of the shin splint became clearer for me only after reading Andy Franklyn-Miller’s article, “The Athletic Shin,” which appeared in the book, Sports Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation: Integrating Medicine and Science for Performance Solutions.

Franklyn-Miller begins his analysis by acknowledging that the existing literature on this very common lower limb pain in athletes is confusing, and that “shin splint” has become the colloquial term for various kinds of clinical presentations. When a runner reports to a specialist with “shins that kill,” he or she is likely to hear a series of acronyms: OLLI (overuse lower limb injury), ELLP (exertional lower limb pain), MTSS (medial tibial stress syndrome), and CECS (chronic exertional compartment syndrome). So, we have several different letters, when the only ones that an athlete in pain is concerned with are: HELP!

At this point, Franklyn-Miller gets to the heart of his premise: that the underlying mechanism of all these conditions comes down to muscle overload. “Accordingly,” he says, “they should be grouped together as a new diagnosis of biomechanical overload syndrome,” which he calls BOS. I like this acronym. It’s only three letters, and what they stand for made perfect sense to me.

So what does BOS basically mean? Franklyn-Miller points out that each of the common shin pain conditions (all those other acronyms) is directly related to muscle groups and the loading they experience when running, jumping, and landing.

He analyzes each of the current acronyms from a science-based perspective, and then presents a premise that I think lands a very powerful punch to the shin problem. He notes that all these current diagnoses have a “maladaptation to load that is modifiable by altering running kinematics,” and that the common feature in all of these causative mechanisms is that the “smaller muscles of the leg having to work excessively or adapt to a higher workload too quickly.” He even explains how stress fractures can be the end result of this problem: “Continued loading without the force absorption competency of the fatigued muscles can lead to bony overload and, eventually, to stress fracture.”

His recognition that BOS is difficult to treat conservatively really hooked me on his perspective, and he acknowledges that treatments such as stretching, foam rolling, acupuncture, massage, shockwave therapy, and activity modification have had limited success.

Furthermore, Franklyn-Miller doesn’t stop where most insights on shin pain might end: The reality that the people treating this painful condition can continue to explore just about any conventional therapy while knowing, as Dr. Richard Schuster pointed out over 25 years ago, “when all else fails, the accumulative effect of impact shock can be reduced by running less.” In fact, Franklyn-Miller goes right after the mechanics of running. “To fully understand BOS,” he says, “we need to appreciate the whole lower limb, and many of the changes need to be made proximally in order to affect a distal change.”

The angle of the tibia in the stance phase is very important because the tibialis anterior functions eccentrically to control the foot’s force as it strikes the ground. The wrong angle of attack can overload that muscle. Identifying the wrong angle of attack leads to the all-important question: How do we fix it?

“First,” he says, “reducing ground contact time allows for less pronounced ankle dorsiflexion and reduces the time-under-tension, and thereby mechanical work of the muscles. Second, a stiffer knee allows the posterior chain to take more of the load, reducing anterior knee, shin, and calf work.”

Basically, what Franklyn-Miller is proposing are strategies that allow the “big muscles to do big jobs,” and he believes these strategies can be coached. The key is improved hip extension propulsion and working the big muscles, which then “offload the smaller muscles further down the chain.”

So what kinds of mechanics changes is he advocating? The specifics are based upon some common features we see in athletes experiencing a biomechanical overload: overstriding, poor gluteal drive, and excessive heel strike. What are the “fixes” for these problems? First, he emphasizes an upright body over the center of mass with a neutral pelvis.

This is the same mechanic I present to my sprinters. I tell them to imagine their pelvis as a soup bowl, and their goal is to avoid spilling the soup forward out of the bowl (anterior pelvic tilt). Franklyn-Miller describes the near-vertical torso as the most effective position because it allows proximal muscle control, which prevents an overload on the lower leg. In addition to a level pelvis, a vertical tibia at contact along with a midfoot landing should be emphasized to runners, as this will reduce the load on the anterior compartment.

The Solution Has Similarities to Speed Training

This emphasis on kinematics reflects current approaches to speed training, and perhaps this makes sense to those of us who see many more incidents of shin pain in distance runners than in sprinters. Many of his mechanics cues are even similar to those that Dr. Ken Clark offers for the sprinters he coaches. Franklyn-Miller cues an upright body as a “string pulling your head to the ceiling” or “resting your chin on a shelf.” Clark refers to this upright posture as “peeking over a fence.” Franklyn-Miller refers to the piston-like downward action of the leg as “punching the foot into the ground.” Clark cues the attack phase of ground contact as “hammering the nail.”

It is also no surprise that Franklyn-Miller notes the technique training of highly regarded speed coach Frans Bosch, and even refers to Bosch’s insights on mechanics in one of his presentations. Their like-minded approaches make sense to me. After all, it was Bosch who once described a long distance runner as “just a sprinter with bad coordination.”

So, if the solution to biomechanical overload comes down to foot position, tibial angle, and decreased ground contact time, perhaps the riddle of the shin splint really should be this: When is a shin splint no longer a shin splint? When athletes run like sprinters.

I am excited to have come across Andy’s article, and will continue reading just about everything he discusses in the world of sports medicine. Readers are encouraged to check out Andy’s blog.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

References

Bosch, Frans. “High Speed Running: Positive Running Presentation 1.” Presentation at the Loyola Speed Summit, Chicago, IL. July 1, 2007.

Clark, Ken. “You Can Teach Speed: Systematic Approach to Improving Max Velocity.” Presentation at CES Performance, Houston, TX, Sept. 16, 2016.

Franklyn-Miller, A. (2015) The Athletic Shin. In D. Joyce & D. Lewindon (Eds.), Sports Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation: Integrating Medicine and Science for Performance Solutions. London: Routledge.

Schuster, R. (1980, Sept.). Shin Splints: The Latest on Causes, Cures, and Prevention. Runner, 22.

 

Achieving success in sport, particularly at the elite level, is a complex process. The days of natural talent representing the most important factor in being successful are long gone. In a modern world where sport is a billion-dollar business, there are many elements required to ensure an athlete achieves their dream. Among the factors playing a role in turning potential talent into success are:

• Effective Coaching
• Desire
• Mental Strength
• Preparation and Recovery

Because these factors influence athletic training and performance, it is essential for the coaches and athletes to be aware of the extent of their impact. This desire has led to a huge focus on the area of athlete monitoring.

In this article, we’ll look at this concept of monitoring and its impact on modern sport. We’ll look at why monitoring is necessary and the benefits it can bring as well as its potential challenges. We will also outline how the Metrifit system addresses these challenges and provides a platform that is straightforward, effective, and informative. Metrifit will help improve performance, for both teams and individuals, and hopefully prove to be the difference when it comes to achieving success.

Monitoring is Essential to Achieve Success

The benefits of monitoring are so plentiful, it’s hard to understand a time when it was not a significant portion of an athlete’s training program. Quite simply, monitoring improves an athlete’s performance through a combination of several factors. Monitoring an athlete’s training program helps ensure they are in the best possible condition to train. This, in turn, leads to a competitive edge.

Monitoring gives coaches the opportunity to construct individualized training programs and optimize the prescription of training load and recovery. Aside from ensuring an athlete is following a suitable training program, monitoring assists in identifying such potential problems as injury, illness, and burnout. Each of these factors can hamper an athlete’s ability to train consistently. If they can avoid missing training sessions, they will be better prepared to achieve success.

Monitoring also develops an athlete’s self-awareness and accountability, giving them a greater sense of responsibility for their well-being. With access to relevant data, the athlete has a greater understanding of how their own body functions. Consequently, they have increased focus to follow the correct program and a greater sense of motivation and confidence.

What Should an Athlete Monitor?

Next, we need to identify the areas in an athlete’s program that should be monitored to improve overall well-being and performance.

This idea is highlighted in “Monitoring Athletes, Taking Advantage of Technology,” which underlines the requirement that the information gathered must be relevant:

“The first question that the coach needs to consider is what factors should be monitored. The question should identify the difference between what is ‘nice to know’ information versus what is ‘need to know’ information. Ideally the factors are scientifically validated to result in either enhanced training adaptation or performance outcomes directly. In other words, factors that result in confident actionable outcomes.”

Metrifit’s approach not only covers the physical requirements of a particular sport but also helps the coach derive the benefits of other factors that have a significant influence on an athlete’s well-being: training, body, nutrition, mind, and sleep.

Training

The value of monitoring athletes has been discussed at length in recent years. Perhaps Vernon Gambetta sums it up perfectly in the title of his recent article stating simply, “Monitoring Training is Critical for Success”:

“Training is a repeating (rollover) process consisting of four steps: assessment, planning, implementation, and monitoring. Monitoring this process is essential to making the training meaningful and keeping it on track. The most effective training programs that I have seen and implemented are those that have a built-in monitoring system. It does not have to be anything elaborate or scientific. Whatever it is, it just needs to be used consistently,” Gambetta states.

Body

One of the key elements of training and performing is ensuring that an athlete is in their best possible condition for performing. One of the most important factors in this regard is staying free from injury.

Tim J Gabbett highlights this in his article “Training-Injury Prevention Paradox” when he states that there is a clear need to ensure that:

• athletes are following the correct training program
• athletes are training sufficiently to build up their physical capacities
• athletes are not doing too little training

Injuries are more likely to result from inappropriate training, Gabbett explains, and non-contact injuries are more likely caused by excessive and rapid increases in training. He argues that the way to deal with these problems is to monitor the athlete’s training program.

Nutrition

No matter how well a training regime prepares an athlete, they will never achieve optimum performance without proper nutrition. As everyone knows, a car will not run at its best unless it has a full tank of quality fuel. Likewise, an athlete’s body must be fueled correctly to reach their peak, as we are reminded in “Nutrition and Hydration for Sports Performance”:

“An adequate diet, in terms of quantity and quality, before, during and after training and competition will maximize performance. Without the correct nutritional support an athlete will not be able to sustain an intensive training programme over a long period of time, hence improvement will be limited.”

As a result, monitoring diet is essential to achieve the right balance of carbohydrates, proteins, fats, minerals, vitamins, and water to ensure athletes get the most from their training, can recover and, most important, produce their best when it comes to competition.

Mind

When competing for a top place at any level of sport, mental well-being is as significant as physical well-being. As a result, awareness of issues that could potentially add stress to an athlete is hugely important.

Crucial factors with mental health issues are identification and early and effective intervention. Monitoring is vital in this regard. Brian Clarke, Head Strength and Conditioning Coordinator and Wellness Department Chair at Noblesville High School, Indiana found that using Metrifit monitoring during the past year provided X-ray vision into the habits/ lifestyles and stressors their athletes were experiencing on a day-to-day basis. Its importance can also go beyond athletic challenges.

“It offers shy or quiet students a voice they normally would not have the courage to have. I was able to identify some severe mental health concerns in two students this past year based off of consistent low Readiness to train scores and conversations with the students. It was literally a potential life-saver,” Brian explains.

Sleep

The importance of sleep to an athlete is significant in overall performance, and monitoring sleep patterns is now regarded as a must for athletes and coaches. The manual “Sleep and Recovery” explains the importance of sleep in terms of training, training effect, recovery, and performance with mental and physical sharpness directly linked to sleep:

“All sport requires the ability to process information very quickly and react. Athletes also need to have high levels of focus and motivation. These functions will be impaired without adequate sleep. Minimal sleep can also decrease glucose metabolism which fuels the brain and the body for mental and physical performance. Immune function can also be impaired which puts athletes at a greater risk for sickness. When athletes fail to sleep enough (less than 8 hours per night), the body fails to produce the adequate amount of testosterone.”

Challenges and Solutions to Effective Monitoring

Having established the benefits of monitoring and the specific areas that need to be monitored, the next issue is how to access to the specific information required to make a difference to an athlete.

One of the biggest challenges to monitoring an athlete is creating a set of questions broad enough to collect the necessary information and not too complicated or time-consuming for the athlete to follow. Otherwise, it will be difficult for the athlete to buy-in to the system. In “Monitoring the athlete training response: subjective self-reported measures trump commonly used objective measures: a systematic review,” Anna E. Saw, Luana C. Main, and Paul B. Gastin provide an overview of the main challenges to ensuring the appropriate questions are posed:

“These threats to validity have been attributed to cognitive and situational factors. Cognitive factors include miscomprehension and recall error, which may be addressed with clear instruction and minimizing the period of recall. Ensuring understanding of the overall task may also improve motivation to respond accurately, thus reducing conscious bias. Conscious bias is often the result of an individual responding in a socially desirable manner, generally over-reporting favorable responses and under-reporting unfavorable responses. In the sports setting, this may mean athletes ‘faking good’ to appear to be coping or to gain selection, or ‘faking bad’ to have their training reduced. Therefore it is important to not only consider the design of a self-report measure, but also the individual and situational factors which may influence the ability to obtain meaningful, accurate and consistent data from athletes.

It is clear to see that this information is of vital importance in preparing an athlete and the key to discovering such crucial data is clearly in the design of the questions and the structure of the survey to make it as easy as possible for the athlete to provide accurate information.”

Ensuring that athletes enter genuinely accurate information is one of the main challenges to a monitoring program. It is a question that initially concerns some of our clients. In reality, it is not an issue. In fact, not only do athletes buy-in to the system, they take on greater responsibility and ownership.

A monitoring system also creates a strong relationship between athlete and coach. There may be concern that an athlete will log inaccurate information, particularly student athletes. A coach who is on top of his game and familiar with his athlete, however, can quickly identify this by comparing scores to performance. By encouraging ownership, students and coaches equally share in the athlete/team development process. This leads to a strengthening of the relationship between coach and athlete which also contributes to improving performance.

Some coaches fear that the process is too complicated and time consuming and, as a result, will prove counterproductive and interfere with training time.

The key is to use clear and relevant questions with a range of response options that are easily understood, allowing for swift and accurate inputs. A recent Metrifit Webinar illustrates how straightforward logging information is very and how an athlete can do it on a cell phone in seconds. This information becomes instantly accessible to the coach.

“We are very lucky we have a player-monitoring tool, whereby players can communicate with you every day via psychometric data; sleep quality, sleep duration, stress levels, muscle soreness. What that means is by 11 am every day I have valuable pieces of information relating to every member of the squad.” — Cian O’Neill, Kildare Senior Football Manager

The final major challenge with implementing a monitoring system is making sure that we not only gather specific information that is useful but also that we use the information effectively in a training program to improve results.

Benefits for Coach and Athlete are Clear

As we can see, the value of monitoring all aspects of an athlete’s circumstances is essential if they are to realize their potential and perform at peak level on the occasion when it matters most.

Monitoring athletes helps us learn their patterns of behavior and habits. Capturing that data allows coaches to evaluate the information and analyze it, which in turn helps them guide athletes to their best performance.
Vernon Gambetta sums up the process when he states:

“Monitoring training allows you to reconcile what was planned for training and what was achieved. It is very specific to the sport, the performance level of the athlete, the age of the athlete, and the gender. Once a system of monitoring has been implemented, the information gathered must be straightforward and simple so that it can be easily interpreted and modifications can be made easily as needed.”

Analytics

Once a monitoring platform is successfully implemented, the next challenge is to get meaningful data into the hands and minds of the people who can make effective use of it. A central hub of data should become a funnel or platform to collate relevant key performance indicators. Insights from this data need to be visualized in such a way that they promote actionable intelligence. All the data in the world is useless if it’s not used to promote change and improvement.

All the data in the world is useless if it’s not used to promote change and improvement. Share on X

Effective monitoring has many benefits for the athlete as the information gathered can be vital in preparing for the next step of the training program. Monitoring is only useful if it provides information or leads to practices that ultimately improve performance.
Of course, there are challenges to ensuring the best possible outcome for athletes, and we have established how these obstacles are relatively easy to overcome. When that is achieved, the benefits for both coach and athlete are clear.

Metrifit Ticks all the Monitoring Boxes

Our latest product, Metrifit Ready to Perform (RTP), takes all this into consideration and, by providing feedback and analytics, aims to promote self-awareness and accountability on behalf of the athlete.

Metrifit RTP makes the monitoring technology of a professional team available on a new platform and at an affordable price. This is backed up by sophisticated descriptive analytics and intelligent feedback alerting coaches and athletes to any changes in behavior that may otherwise go unnoticed.

Our additional products, Metrifit Gold and Metrifit Elite, offer more complex monitoring and customizable features. For more information, please visit www.metrifit.com or contact us at [email protected] or follow us on Twitter or Facebook.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

 

References

1. Asking the right questions to assess athlete well-being
2. Metrifit helps to build the crucial athlete coach relationship
3. Metrifit provides x-ray vision into the lifestyle of the student athlete
4. Essential to keep track of factors that impact on performance
5. Monitoring sleep is invaluable for a coach
6. Session-RPE is an easy and effective method of monitoring training load
7. Athlete self-report measures
8. Study highlights the benefits of subjective self-reporting measures in training
9. The importance of relevant monitoring in training
10. The benefits of sleep for elite athletes
11. Monitoring training is critical for success By Vernon Gambetta
12. Monitoring the athlete training response: subjective self-reported measures trump commonly used objective measures: a systematic review by Anna E Saw, Luana C Main, and Paul B Gastin

 

Athletes can achieve great results by harnessing the power of potentiation and efficiency and applying it to selective ballistic endeavors specifically through the use of such dense, complex training methods in the context of applicable sport movements. Acute, complex, high-density training provides the greatest neural adaptation benefits and allows the often separated qualities of speed and strength to feed on, and benefit, one another.

There are two truly outstanding complex movements that marry strength and speed to take explosive power to its highest level:

• French Contrast
• Potentiation Clusters

In the world of jump training and athletic performance, there’s a lot of talk about complex training. Improving speed helps improve weight room marks. And, when properly performed, weight room work offers strong acute benefits to the explosive coordination of various speed movements.

This article takes the idea of complex training and expands on it in practical and theoretical ways. The recommendations are a plug and play training method that will yield immediate results when performed correctly with a wide range of athletes. (See point #1 in my last article on the impact of specific variability in training.)

I started experimenting with higher density complex models after learning about Cal Dietz and his work in this area, his website www.xlathlete.com, and his book Triphasic Training co-written with Ben Peterson.

I was tentative for a long time about the extended use of denser complex training because of mixed research regarding potentiation, most of which utilizes heavy deep barbell squats as the potentiator. This isn’t the best fit for a lot of complex work, as I’ll explain later. But because of Cal’s work, Frans Bosch’s book Strength Training and Coordination: An Integrated Approach, and plenty of time to experiment over the years, I now view training as a coordination and movement puzzle. The proper use of complex and stacked training is a key to solving the puzzle and induces better performance.

Jump training is a coordination and movement puzzle. Share on X

Clearly, many track athletes have been successful without traditional complex training using barbells. But how many of these track athletes played a team sport as part of their training histories, such as football, basketball, soccer, or volleyball?

Many coaches and athletes don’t think of team sports as complex training for skill acquisition. Playing a pickup game of basketball, however, delivers a big stimulus for multi-directional movement demand, coordination, and enhanced efficiency under fatigue. In the course of a training or practice session, athletes generally wait until after a few pickup games before trying to do dunks. Most of my trainees have been at their highest performance level after a few pickup games.

Explosive coordination loves the skill mash-up of team sports play. Share on X

Explosive coordination loves the skill mash-up of team sports play. I believe coaches can use the team sport coordination principles under the potentiation umbrella found in resistance training and combine them with the reflexive power of plyometrics to further enhance explosive speed performance.

Ideas from the World of Powerlifting and the Real Mechanism of Dense Power Training

Over the years, I’ve had an up and down relationship with complex training. The research surrounding the concept doesn’t support using it in a program unless there is a lot of extra time to kill.

It takes about ten minutes for the potentiation effect from a heavy weighted exercise (85 to 100% 1RM) to truly improve a ballistic movement like a vertical jump, according to most papers. With modern programming, it’s hard to find a specific protocol that uses this recommendation. Many coaches use post-activation potentiation training to sell their programs, but based on the science, the training doesn’t work, at least not acutely.

Density and Speed Considerations

When we look at training speed, we generally think of running timed fast 150’s in spikes with 8 to 15 minutes of rest in between. Running fast with full recovery is a premier way to build track speed. But this high rest method isn’t the only way to build speed and power, especially for movements that have a little longer contact times, such as jumping.

I’m a coach who’s been typecast as the plyometric guy, the arena where I have the most distinction based on much of my work. My day job is a university strength coach, and using barbells to improve athletic performance across a variety of team settings is important to me regarding the total development of athletes.

There has been an exodus from overemphasizing performance levels in general preparatory exercises (squats, cleans, bench, etc.). I’ve been a strong proponent of this in the last few years, but I think it’s unwise to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Shying away from the powerful benefits of properly selected and coached barbell training will leave gains on the table for many athletes. Barbell training can deliver the coordinative mechanisms seen in the expression of powerful movements, such as jumping and sprinting.

Barbell training delivers the coordinative mechanisms expressed in powerful movements. Share on X

Anecdotes from the Barbell World

Olympic weightlifting coach Glenn Pendlay recently posted an article about the power of training density for bringing up a lagging deadlift as well as Olympic lift performance: “The Holy Grail of Sports Training: EMOM Sets.”

Pendlay talked about his experience with powerlifting coach Louie Simmons, who recommended a high-density workout to bring up Pendlay’s lagging deadlift by doing small repetition deadlifting sets every minute on the minute (EMOM) over many sets.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Westside Barbell (@westsidebarbellofficial)

 

Why would Simmons recommend EMOM training to bring up the deadlift in particular? Doesn’t high-density training build endurance rather than power? Typically, yes, but when utilizing strength exercises (and even contrasting forms of speed), the story can be different.

By the 7th or 8th round of an EMOM deadlift set, something strange happens. The weight starts to come off the ground much faster as if the brakes have suddenly released.

Of all the lifts, the deadlift requires the most mental strength. This means athletes generally lift a smaller proportion of what they’re physically capable of compared to other powerlifting movements. After all, we don’t hear of mothers squatting the house to save their child, but rather pulling up their car! (Perhaps a poor anecdote, but I do strongly believe pulling strength, in particular, has very high untapped reserves compared to other lifting movements).

Perhaps this phenomenon is due to a high risk of injury or because the bar must start from a dead stop position or a combination of these and other factors. Regardless, a very strong mental drive is required to pull the bar from the ground.

What does this have to do with the use of EMOM work in bringing up the lift? Coaches don’t know exactly why EMOM training works (even researchers don’t have this pinned down), but we strongly suspect it has to do with the gradual potentiation of prime movers and a significant reduction of antagonist muscle activity.

We do know, through the research, that any potentiation likely occurs in the fast-twitch fibers. This alone makes high-density training important to improving the rate of force development. Whatever combination of factors improves lifting power and efficiency, it’s the nervous system’s role that leads to better performance.

Overview of Denser Complex and Skill Acquisition Methods

Rather than looking at potentiation from the standpoint of gross motor unit recruitment, such as the relationship between deep squatting and standing vertical jumping, look at it from the standpoint of skill stacking in a circuit-based form of motor development learning.

French Contrast helps improve the motor variability of the total training effect. When we feed the nervous system with subtle differences and perturbations in typical training patterns (such as performing wicket drills with offset mini hurdles or sprint stride drills with uneven pieces of tape), we create a nursery of new improved motor patterns and athletic potential. French Contrast uses both potentiation (improving the availability of the motor pool) and variability (which improves coordination and skill acquisition) to build a better total pattern.

The Million Dollar Workout developed by Chris Korfist and Dan Fichter is another great method that stacks one specific sprint exercise with three supportive skills. Athletes can get really fast, really quickly with this method, which I learned at a Speed Football Consortium. It’s an impressive training method, and my clients have gained great results with it.

I’ll use a quick anecdote from my high jump days as another example of acute coordinative effects. On any short approach day, I performed 8-12 short approach high jumps using 3-5 steps. If I immediately followed the short approaches with a full approach and jump, my penultimate step mechanics and coordination were horribly distorted in favor of the 4-step jump. I would go straight into the bar rather than up and over.

The human body will warm itself up and align itself for whatever skill is being worked. If you perform 5 sets of 8 deep squats and then do a vertical jump, the jump form will imitate the biomechanics of the squats you just performed before you got under the bar.

If we work on a skill one-dimensionally, we’ll create results for that dimension. If we bounce between two or more complementary skills, we’ll end up with a higher and better-rounded level of performance. The better the coach is at selecting the skills, the higher the improvement in performance.

This training concept is heavily used by many current swim coaches. Sets revolve around many circuits of stacking skills, portions of strokes with various emphasis, gear-based swims, cruise-speed swims, and then hard swims. Different strokes can be used to potentiate an athlete’s main style of stroke and enhance their coordination range.

Below is an example of a common swim circuit for sprinters. Much of it is a foreign language to us track coaches, but we can clearly see the concepts of improving coordination and building robust swim patterns.

Sample Swim Sprint Set

• 4×25 with a swim parachute
• Odds: kick to 12.5, swim from 12.5 to 25
• Evens: scull to 12.5, swim from 12.5 to 25
• #1+2 steady effort, #3+4 stronger effort
• 2×50 no parachute swim, build to a strong effort
• 4×25 with fins #1+2 kick to 12.5, swim to 25, #3+4 swim fast

(Note: a standard short course pool is 25 yards long so many portions of sets will be halfway or 12.5 yards.)

Swim is a sport that is built more toward the “art” end of the “art and science” spectrum. This is appropriate because moving in the water is more intuitive, subconscious, and feel-driven than any other athletic movement. In various sports, there may be cases where strength can overcome technique, but you can never fight the water since everything must come within the scope of the technical model.

In this technique and feel-driven routine, it’s no surprise that set diversity and complex skill training has become common practice in swim training sets. I believe land-based sport coaches can learn from this workout approach and apply it to their own programming.

French Contrast: Nuts and Bolts

French Contrast training, in my experience, is one of the fastest ways to build vertical jumping ability in athletes. I’ve regularly seen four-inch vertical gains in one training session. It’s also a great method to realize an athlete’s existing strength in the form of vertical jump and acceleration improvements.

Regardless of the exact science, French Contrast works acutely and chronically. A French Contrast session looks something like this:

• Heavy partial range lift or isometric for 1-3 reps
• Rest 20 seconds

• Force oriented plyometric exercise, such as a depth jump
• Rest 20 seconds

• Speed-strength oriented lift for low to medium reps, 2-5 typically
• Rest 20 seconds

• Speed-oriented plyometric exercise of higher repetition range
• Rest 2-5 minutes and repeat

First French Contrast Movement: Big Strength

The first exercise in the French Contrast circuit is a big strength movement which activates as many relevant motor units as possible based on the ultimate movement outcome of the French Contrast circuit.

This strength movement can be a traditional up and down lift or an isometric, depending on the outcome goal. If you’re building a training phase, it may be better to use standard lifting reps for their hormonal and muscle building effects. For more of a realization effect that maximizes the speed end of the complex, I recommend using partial range, or isometric, work such as an isometric half or quarter squat hold for 3-7 seconds.

Several years ago, jumps coach Mike Goss told me of an interesting study that shows the effects isometric movements can have on potentiation. Using weights on a softball bat to warm up harmed unweighted bat speed. Conversely, athletes who performed 3×5 second isometric reps pulling a bat handle against an immovable resistance in a specific batting position significantly improved their bat speed for a 2 to 12-minute window. This also shows us that isometrics allow for potentiation in a shorter time frame than the 10 minutes we commonly see cited in the research using deep squatting for potentiation.

This idea opens a door for many creative variations of isometric movement that have relevance to a variety of sports skills. Isometrics also help with safety. When working with large groups of less experienced athletes, an easy way to achieve overload is to perform isometric positions. There is much less that can go wrong, and the athletes must focus much harder on achieving the correct position and muscular tension.

For circuits emphasizing vertical jumping, or knee-based movement, a squat (either traditional or isometric) is the optimal first exercise. If the program’s emphasis is on sprinting or bounding, a hinge movement is a good first exercise, such as a trap bar deadlift from blocks. I find it less useful to use isometric exercises for hinge strength simply because of the strain factor. An isometric back extension or good morning, however, are viable options.

The list below gives good leadoff exercises to potentiate and widen the relevant motor pool without inducing too much fatigue. These exercises are typically 60-90% of an athlete’s maximal effort and are performed for 1-3 repetitions or 3-7 seconds of isometric.

Hinging/Sprinting/Bounding

• Trap bar deadlift from 2-8” blocks
• Isometric back extension (heavy)
• Isometric good morning (bilateral or staggered)
• Regular deadlift
• Concentric only deadlift
• Power clean from the floor

Squatting/Jumping/Vertical Force

• Isometric quarter squat
• 1/2 or 2/3 partial squat
• Split stance partial squat from a rack start
• Partial squat from a rack start
• kBox ½ squats
• Deep squats (accumulation phase)

For squats, I often avoid deep squatting for two reasons. First, the depth of the movement leads to firing patterns that don’t blend well with most athletic movements occurring in a significantly lower degree of knee bend. The coordination is just too different.

Second, the lengthening and loading of the quadriceps muscles create too much local fatigue and coordination disruption to optimize the rest of the French Contrast prescription.

I do believe that athletes who are capable of good technique can use deep squats for the leadoff training exercise, but I consider this a method more for eliciting an accumulation cycle training effect on a muscular and hormonal level, not a realization cycle for neuromuscular improvement. Either option is viable if the coach knows where they are headed with it.

Second French Contrast Movement: Heavy Plyometric

The second exercise in the French Contrast is a heavier plyometric exercise with relatively longer ground contact time. The contact time should remain within the scope of the specific movement the athlete is trying to improve. This movement also has strong potentiation qualities. Some of the easiest jumping I’ve done and seen in my career has occurred a few minutes after several sets of challenging depth jumps properly performed.

Below are some sample options for this portion of the French Contrast workout. Jumps are done for 2-4 reps and bounding or resisted sprint work for 10-20 meters.

Hinging/Sprinting/Bounding

• Bounding
• Multi-jumps
• Repeated standing long jumps/bunnies
• Resisted sprints
• Hinge-based jumps

Squatting/Jumping/Vertical Force

• Depth jumps
• Hurdle hops (higher hurdles relative to maximal ability)
• Rapid box hops (on a higher box, 12-18”)
• Box jumps/seated box jumps

Third French Contrast Movement: Explosive Strength

The third portion of the French Contrast is based on an explosive strength. This includes all the Olympic lifts and their derivatives (in the 50-60% 1RM range) as well as simpler explosive lifts such as jump squats.

When performing Olympic derivatives, the most helpful movements for the circuit’s total effect are those performed from the hang or block position. Going from the floor, however, can be done by athletes who can achieve clean bar speed easily. Again, these exercises are generally performed with 50-60% 1RM range, but this can sway a bit in either direction due to the nature of the movements. Rep ranges are 2-4 repetitions.

Due to the higher bar speeds in this portion of the circuit, it’s more acceptable to perform lifts that incorporate larger ranges of motion in all phases of training.

Below is a list of appropriate movements for explosive strength.

Hinging/Sprinting/Bounding

• Hang clean
• Hang snatch
• Kettlebell swing/lumberjack (depending on whether you are in the Poliquin camp)
• Speed deadlift
• Single leg hang clean/snatch

Squatting/Jumping/Vertical Force

• Speed half squat with bodyweight, or less, on the bar
• Push jerk
• Drop snatch
• Hang squat clean (full catch)
• Rapid deep or partial squats with anchored feet (pull into the bottom)
• Jump squat
• Jump squat from bar resting on pins

Fourth French Contrast Movement: High Speed or Overspeed

The final exercise in the French Contrast is based on high speed or even overspeed movement. This includes band-assisted jumps and any plyometric exercise where an athlete uses ground contacts equal to, or less than, what they experience in their specific jumping or speed-based skill in their sport.

There are cases where I might use versions of this list in both the 2nd and 4th exercise slots of the French Contrast series, particularly with track and field athletes rather than athletes who rely on a greater use of ground contact in their sport, such as football.

Below are some examples of this portion of the circuit.

Hinging/Sprinting/Bounding

• Short contact bounding
• Ballistic throws/multi-throws
• Overspeed sprinting (on an apparatus like the 1080 Sprint)

Squatting/Jumping/Vertical Force

• Rapid tuck jumps
• Speed box hops (shorter box)
• Assisted jumps with a band and cage or assisted apparatus
• Drop jumps from a lower box (preferably with some sort of ground contact measurement/feedback)/li>
• Hurdle hops over lower hurdles with generous spacing

Sample French Contrast Workouts

Here are some examples of how the French Contrast’s influence on potentiation, coordination, and motor learning can occur in an actual workout. This article emphasizes this aspect of training since currently there aren’t many “nuts and bolts” articles available.

Here is one of my favorite Squat Pathways of the French Contrast sessions:

• Heavy ¼ squat ISO hold, 5 seconds
• Speed box hop x 3-5 reps or depth jump x 2-4 reps
• Speed half squat or anchored deep squat x 3-4 reps
• Assisted vertical jumps x 4-5 reps

Along the Hinge Pathway, I enjoy this circuit:

• Heavy hex deadlift from blocks x 2 reps
• Standing triple jump x 1 rep
• Clean from the hang or floor x 2-3 reps
• Vertical overhead or overhead back shot throws x 3-4 reps (light weight)

In the videos below, Paul Cater of The Alpha Project in Monterey, California, demonstrates a circuit of both the squat and hinge pathways.

Video 1: French Contrast

Video 2: Hinge Pathway

Throughout this training session, Paul added 10cm (4”) to his vertical jump as he moved through the French Contrast circuits. This is a typical gain when correctly performing this training.

For those who are in the specialized camp and want to go SPE on the circuit, perform a program similar to the following for sprint speed:

• Heavy ISO back extension x 5 seconds
• RDL/hinge jumps x 3-4 reps
• Explosive back extension with 50% 1RM x 3-5 reps
• Vertical overhead shot throws x 3-5 reps (light weight)

I perform 3-6 rounds of French Contrast, or possibly more if “the pan is hot.” I like to take 4-6 minutes between each round to test vertical jumps on a jump mat, especially in circuits that emphasize the realization of motor skills. It takes about 2-4 minutes after each circuit before fatigue subsides enough for the test to be a good one. Typically, vertical jumps will increase by an inch per round for 3-5 of waves of French Contrast before leveling out.

Vertical jumps will increase an inch per round in 3-5 waves of French Contrast. Share on X

From an absolute physiological perspective, potentiation is simply another way to warm up. It’s a very effective way when correctly performed. Squats will warm up an athlete to jump, but most of my athletes say a game of basketball warms them up much more. As mentioned, basketball has a wide variety of explosive movements (random motor learning) packaged in a format with enough training density to have the central nervous system firing on all cylinders.

French Contrast is a modest way to take this concept and alternate between high force and high speed in an approach that accomplishes the same goal in a more controlled manner and delivers a more precise training effect.

Potentiation Clusters

Potentiation clusters are another great method to induce potentiation, coordination, and density-based gains. Potentiation clusters are essentially complex training done in the EMOM style.

To perform a potentiation cluster, simply pair up a low rep strength exercise with an explosive exercise and perform them in a relatively high-density format across 8-12 sets. This is complex training performed in a very specific fashion that optimizes neural adaptations.

An example looks like this superset:

• 12×1 cleans from the floor, starting at 55%1RM and working up to 80%
• 12x20m speed mini-bounding, progressing from speed contacts to maximal distance bounds
• 60-90 seconds rest between circuit exercises

Any strength exercise can be used, but I’ve had the best success with Olympic lifts and moderate to heavy barbell step-ups onto a 10 to 12-inch box. Selective isometrics could also be worked into this method.

I also like simple, and still very effective, supersets of 1-2 cleans with a single rep multi-throw (if space is available). Anything from the “strength bucket” will do.

The speed exercise can be drawn from a wide pool, depending on what we’re trying to improve. For potentiation clusters, I enjoy bounding the most. I’ve found that the more reflexive the speed exercise, the better; perhaps because there is more reflex improvement as opposed to a more static exercise like a seated box jump.

With that, here is a more detailed example of what this cluster might look like:

90-second rest between all exercises

• Power clean from the floor: 1×55%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×57%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×60%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×62%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×64%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×62%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×64%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×66%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×70%
• Speed-contact alternate leg bounding x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×74%
• Alternate leg bounding for distance x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×77%
• Alternate leg bounding for distance x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×80%
• Alternate leg bounding for distance x 15m

• Power clean from the floor: 1×73%
• Alternate leg bounding for distance x 15m

 

Video 3: Potentiation Cluster

One of my tricks is to set the tone of the 12-round series with speed-oriented, quick contact movements, hence the low %1RM for the cleans, and emphasize speed contacts in the bounding. The last 3 or 4 sets of a 10-12 set routine transition to more force and longer contacts.

When transitioning to heavier relative weights and faster contacts during the last few sets, an athlete will carry both the potentiation of the previous clusters and the coordination pattern of fast force development (similar to the 4-step high jump versus the full approach example). This helps to improve reflex actions and work muscles at their optimal length and tension levels for maximal speed.

When using potentiation clusters, it’s helpful to use a velocity-based bar tracking method to help motivate athletes toward higher rate of force development in the lift.

Conclusion

Before last year, I considered this training method only useful in the “realization” phase of training since it’s based on improving an athlete’s neural efficiency. Now, however, I realize this method is much more than icing on the cake. Instead, neural efficiency and optimized coordination are the cake. At the least, it’s a very important part of the main training blocks. We want to optimize neural patterns and have an athlete’s physiology adapt to those patterns, not the other way around.

This is the last article of the three-part series on the plyometric workouts I’ve found extremely useful to build explosive power in both track and field and team sport athletes. It marks the culmination of fifteen years of trial and error on my part, and I hope coaches find these principles helpful in developmental programming.

Please check my website Just Fly Sports for updates on my upcoming book Speed Strength, which explores the best methods to build strength within the context of explosive speed development.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

 

In track and field, and running events in particular, the competitive skill is singular. If you’re a sprinter, you can focus on sprinting from a young age and continue to perfect your skills and techniques as you age. This makes the training simpler. It’s not easy, mind you, but you can find a coach who will teach you how to sprint better and focus on that one thing.

Non-track athletes, however, have two skills that affect their competency: their sport skill, and also their sprinting ability. If I’m a football receiver, I can work on how far my pass patterns are and how to catch the ball until I’m blue in the face, but if I don’t figure out how to run faster, it may never matter since I can’t escape the defenders. Speed training is extremely important in field sports. Yet, in my opinion, the coaches and decision makers in sport severely underappreciate it.

Athleticism Needs to Match Skill

I’ll give you an example. I started playing football at 12 years old; before that, I played soccer. During my high school career, I played two to three football seasons in the same calendar year. By the time I reached university, I had 10 seasons of football under my belt. My football IQ and skills allowed me to be a competitive player. I was lacking something, though: My athleticism didn’t match my skill. Not only was I generally weak, as I had only puttered around a gym with no guidance, but I also had zero technical skill in sprinting. How did I go 10 years in a sport, with a plethora of different coaches, organizations, and levels, without ever learning to sprint properly??

The one thing I used to do on every play was sprint. Whether I made a tackle or an interception, or was away from the ball, I still sprinted every play. It wasn’t until I made it to the university level that I had a sprint coach for my team. So, NOW I got to learn how to run better? REALLY!? Isn’t it a little late? I can only imagine what learning some of the fundamentals at an early age could have done for my youth career. In fact, working with this sprint coach is what inspired me to focus on speed in my own coaching.

Sprint training is important in field sports, yet many athletes never learn to sprint correctly. Share on X

The 3 Most Important Components of Speed Training

We have quite a lot of athletes practicing their sports who may not be joining track and field any time soon. Whether you’re an independent or team strength and conditioning coach, you have to take the place of a track and field coach. In my experience, there are three things that non-track (field) athletes need to focus on most when it comes to speed training:

Output and Direction

As coaches, we know that two major factors affect speed: the force we put out and the direction we apply that force. When athletes can do both of those things really well, they will be successful. Teaching the importance of shin angle (the direction we apply force to the ground) to young athletes creates the groundwork for technical cueing through nearly every other drill. What do I mean by shin angle? The angle that an athlete’s shin produces as he makes impact with the ground dictates the direction of the reactionary force coming up from the ground. His goal in acceleration is to have a shin angle with a significant horizontal component to drive him toward his target. This is why sprinters get down in the blocks and football players get down in a three-point stance—they’re creating a shin angle that’s as horizontal as possible.

Many athletes have heard the statement: “Speed is about stride length and stride frequency.” If they don’t understand shin angles, their interpretation of this statement can lead to damage and injury. What results is a group of young athletes who overreach to try and force their stride out longer.

Figure 1 below is a perfect example. This is one of my athletes and the image comes from a session we did together. His back leg is leaving the ground and has a “positive” shin angle, but he reaches too far with his front foot and actually hits the ground with his front shin completely vertical. Thus, he creates a braking mechanism for himself and makes things difficult.

Create a rule when coaching that the angle from the ground through the shin should point in the direction that the athlete plans to go next. Unless he’s braking (negative acceleration), his foot should never strike the ground in front of his knee, whether in a start or at speed. Athletes need a simple understanding of how to best apply their force (direction) to help them sprint and change direction faster.

Once my athletes understand shin angle, I can trust them to identify some of their own issues on film. This allows them to create better habits of positioning on their own.

Acceleration Mechanics

I think it’s safe to say that anyone who understands sprinting knows that acceleration mechanics are important for success. In field athletes, this is even more apparent. The problem is that many field athletes jog around between sprints or even stand and wait. This means that any time something happens where an athlete needs to sprint (with the exception of defensive linemen), they are in an upright position and don’t understand the fundamental techniques of acceleration. This makes “sprinting” to a ball/spot/player all the more difficult.

These athletes need to learn how to create a positive shin angle (image above) and positive body position by creating a forward lean toward their target. This photo is a much better example of positive shin angles and a body leaning toward its target. This will result in a significant amount of force down and back, which will propel the athlete forward and create acceleration. Our body is not set up to accelerate very quickly when we’re completely vertical. Teaching your athletes to use a few acceleration steps with a good forward lean will allow them to reach top speed that much faster.

Force Production

As simple as it sounds, athletes need to learn how to apply a large amount of force to properly accelerate and decelerate. Certain athletes can already do this fairly well and that’s why this has fallen to third on the list. However, even at high levels, there are a large number of athletes who might be exceptional based on their skill set, but lack the aggression and force production to create large amounts of power from each foot strike.

This is what I call, “Going nowhere fast.” The athlete knows he’s supposed to move his limbs quickly but doesn’t know how to apply force to the ground. His limbs move like lightning but his body does not displace quickly (actual speed). Remember, speed is a measurement of distance over time, so no distance means no speed.

Sometimes this can be addressed through cueing and putting them in a scenario where they can focus on applying force without the need to worry about external factors (ball, players, etc.). More likely, you will need to add in various plyometrics to create more power per step (see video below). In order for any athlete to become a fast sprinter, they need to be able to create huge forces for acceleration and then maintain stiffness through maximal velocity.

Video 1: Two Bounding Drills that Demonstrate the Power Created by Correct Shin Angles

Don’t Ignore Speed Development

When it comes to sports coaches, they want to spend all their time focusing on their sport skills. However, when it comes to field sports, this means holding back the athleticism of their players. As strength and conditioning coaches, we need to insist that these players need some time devoted to pure speed development. I guarantee that, given the choice, every coach would rather their athletes play at a faster speed. We just need to help them understand how to get there.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

General Running Adaptations

Running economy is not an innate ability but must be developed through coordination skills and then refined by more advanced training. Over time, a functional coordination pattern replaces the generalized one, the number of muscles activated decreases to only the necessities, and energy cost reduces.

Beginner endurance athletes initially have a steep learning curve as they acquire general fitness just by putting in miles, regardless of how those miles are structured. When a non-athlete first begins a training program, significant neuromuscular adaptations occur to create basic coordination which lays the foundation for biomechanical efficiency (running economy).

Running economy is defined as “the steady-state oxygen consumption at a given running velocity.” (Bonnacci, et al. 2009). In other words, better running economy equates to a more efficient use and recycling of oxygen during a workout. There is a direct correlation between running economy and performance; improving economy through training has a positive effect on performance.

To develop the most efficient mechanics possible, we must create optimal muscle recruitment patterns. This conserves the greatest amount of energy used per stride. Well-trained, advanced runners have extremely refined muscle recruitment patterns compared to novice athletes. Positive adaptations to training are a function of a learned response where the body acquires specific movement patterns linked with ideal task completion.

As a runner masters the skill in practice through repetition, they experience an observable decrease in muscle activation, recruitment of synergists, and variation in movement. In other words, even the most complex skill will form the simplest, most efficient muscle activation pattern.

Adaptation Considerations for Triathlon Events

The muscle adaptations required for swimming are much different than those of biking and running, and biking and running are just as dissimilar to each other. The lower body recruitment patterns don’t necessarily follow a transfer of learning gradient because the bike requires primarily concentric action while the run is eccentric-to-concentric.

As a result, there is a bit of interference between the demands of the two. The neuromuscular system must quickly adapt to this transition to avoid loss of stored elastic energy. Triathletes should train for both the eccentric and concentric demands of the sport to maximize overall efficiency.

Lower leg muscle stiffness improves elastic energy turnaround and running economy. Share on X

Increasing muscle stiffness improves elastic energy turnaround and running economy because lower leg stiffness has a direct relationship to running economy. Carefully designed strength training regimens can help prepare the body for the eccentric and concentric demands of impact by developing muscle and tendon stiffness.

It takes time to develop leg tendon stiffness. Using balance, coordination, and impact plyometric exercises can help. The stages of learning apply to this type of plyometric training since a significant amount of neural adaptation is required to perform the exercises with great efficiency.

Plyometric exercises directly transfer learning and recruitment patterns to a triathlon’s biking and running events. The transfer occurs because the amortization (absorption of impact) phase is ideally kept as short as possible in both plyometrics and the triathlon events. Younger and more novice athletes have notoriously long amortization phases and ground contact times. With training, especially speedwork and plyometric drills, this naturally shortens to the most economic mechanics for the given distance.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

References

Bonacci, J., A. Chapman, P. Blanch, and B. Vicenzino. “Neuromuscular adaptations to training injury and passive interventions: implications for running economy.” Sports Medicine 39(11) (2009): 903-921.

Magill, Richard and David Anderson. Motor Learning and Control: Concepts and Applications. 10th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2013.

 

I recently read a great post by Carl Valle (@spikesonly) on 5 Myths About Eccentric Training Every Coach Ought to Know. When I was asked to put a blog together for SimpliFaster, I wanted to do my best to expand on Carl’s position and further put away Myth No. 4—the one that says eccentric training is only for elite athletes.

As with any other method, eccentric training for young athletes needs to be appropriately progressed and developed over time to ensure they are able to reap the benefits without getting injured.

Eccentric training has been demonstrated to be effective in enhancing performance variables. It has also been shown to be an effective means of reducing the risk of injury across a wide range of populations.

The development of eccentric force-generating capacities was recently described by Dr. Mike Young as “perhaps the single greatest determinant of physical performance” at the Exxentric Summit in Stockholm. Mike has had a huge influence on my training philosophy when it comes to the long-term development of athletes, and I’ve had the pleasure of sitting and listening to him present on a number of occasions over the last year. He is certainly convincing when it comes to the importance of eccentric strength and power when we are seeking to produce the fastest, most robust, and most explosive athletes we possibly can.

In his pursuit of the enhancement of eccentric strength and power, he has an impressive arsenal of advanced training techniques, such as momentum-based loading, e.g.: catch RDLs, supra-maximal concentrics, partial ranges using barbells and flywheel training, and shock plyometrics. These help “put the icing on the cake” and unlock what he describes as the final 5-10% of an athlete’s athletic potential after they have mastered the basics. They do this by developing a high level of relative strength and power through more traditional training methodologies means such as conventional mass-based strength training.

I work with younger athletes aged 11-18 within the Elite Performance Pathway (EPP) part of the Physical Education Curriculum at St. Peter’s R.C. High School in Gloucester, England. So I am very much in the realm of what Mike would call “baking an exceptional cake”—putting the icing on by helping athletes master basic movements and enhancing their physical development through training methods. However, because I understand what I need to do from an eccentric perspective at an elite level when the athletes are ready for it, I have been able to work backwards and start putting a thread of appropriate eccentric training progressions towards that in the early phases of the EPP system.

The EPP System: Building an Athletic Foundation

It is useful to understand the structure of our EPP system in order to provide some context as to where the eccentric training fits into the training puzzle. The EPP is a LTAD program both based around the Youth Physical Development (YPD) Model by Rhodri Lloyd and Jon Oliver (2012), and adapted from the Quadrennial Plan for the High School Athlete by Ian Jeffreys (2008). Within the age range of the athletes we work with, the key areas outlined for development are: strength, power, speed, and agility—indicated by the largest font
within the YPD Model below.

 

The training system begins with the Athletic Foundation phase, which is based around developing competency in fundamental movements: squat, lunge, push, pull, hinge, lift, brace, and rotate. It also includes introducing them to basic jumping and landing activities, speed play, and tag games to develop locomotive movement skills in a broad range of linear and multi-directional movements while providing a high-velocity stimulus in an engaging and challenging learning environment.

It is in the Athletic Foundation phase that we begin to introduce a small dose of eccentric training. The following diagram from my recent talk at the Exxentric Summit provides a summary of some of the progressions used within this phase of the system, and my thought processes and focus points at each stage.

 

Essentially, we establish movement competency first and then we build up the athlete’s ability to tolerate some volume using their body weight alone. From there, we begin to introduce variation in the speed of the execution of the movements, including increasing the time under tension with tempo controls. This includes slower eccentric phases and isometric holds in the base of squats and split squats.

Our next progression is to introduce jumping up onto an object, which provides us with an opportunity to check the athlete’s jumping and landing techniques for movement issues (e.g., knee valgus) when there is a reduced impact as they are landing up onto the box. Then we ask them to demonstrate the ability to perform an altitude landing from the box, absorbing a higher impact landing while still maintaining optimal landing mechanics.

When an athlete has demonstrated they can do this consistently over a number of sessions, we progress to jumping, leaping, and hopping by challenging the athletes to coordinate takeoff and “stick” landings for three seconds. The progressions go from landing on two feet in place, to one foot in place, and then move to linear, lateral, and rotational movements.

The jump training is often completed using a range of different tools to change the tasks and challenges in order to keep things interesting. This includes jumping between hoops, spots, hurdles, and boxes. When athletes can successfully perform the jumps and landings in place, they then begin to travel over increased distances or up onto higher objects.

At this stage, we also include activities such as skipping and playing old-fashioned games like hopscotch. These provide exposure to faster ground contacts in jumping tasks in preparation for higher intensity, fast SSC plyometrics in the later phases of the system.

While working through the jump progressions, I regularly spoke to the young athletes. Some indicated they were a bit bored with the basic jump tasks. I think it’s really important for us to understand their perspective on the training.

Connect training and game movements to keep younger athletes from being bored by basic tasks. Share on X

A highly structured and controlled session may allow us to achieve our objectives, but if it’s really boring, we aren’t going to be able to keep the athletes in the program for the long term. To combat this, I have structured the sessions to incorporate a number of different elements (including the tag games) to keep the lessons going at a good pace. The various elements also provide great opportunities to connect the dots between the training and game movements, which can help athletes understand WHY they need to train through the basic movements. This helps increase their buy in.

The image below outlines a typical structure, showing where the eccentric component fits into the bigger picture of the whole session. This is based around the concept of training “all things, all the time”—where the “things” are the four key areas outlined in the YPD Model: strength, power, speed, and agility. Varying amounts of emphasis are placed on each component throughout the academic year, in order to provide a well-rounded physical development. You can see that eccentric training doesn’t have a huge part at this point, but I see it as a very important thread to keep consistently in the program because of the benefits mentioned earlier and to ensure that they can tolerate the advanced methods in the long term.

 

The last stage of our introduction to jumping and landing is to increase the skill, challenge, and enjoyment by allowing freedom and creativity through the introduction of Parkour/Free Running. These sessions do break away from the above structure, but the variation has provided a fantastic boost to engagement and motivation. In these sessions, the athletes can explore and combine jumping, leaping, and hopping movements with different vaults and challenges under more random conditions. In the last few months, we’ve even built a ninja warrior course using old school gym equipment—wall bars, monkey bars, balance beams, benches, and ropes—and this has been a massive hit with the athletes (and teachers).

Transitioning Into Athletic Development

An athlete will progress into the Athletic Development phase after they’ve met the major objectives within the previous phase relating to the four critical areas.

Once they’ve moved up into the Athletic Development phase, the program increases in intensity and becomes more recognizable as structured strength and conditioning sessions. We also get more time with the athletes within the school day as part of their normal timetable, in addition to their core physical education lessons.

We stick with the philosophy of training “all things, all the time,” providing a range of stimuli for strength, power, speed, and agility. However, the primary objective now is to develop relative strength and power levels through general strength exercises (squat, deadlift, bench, pull up, split squat, RDL) using higher volume set and rep schemes to start with (i.e. 3×10 reps). Then we move down the rep ranges, gradually increasing the intensity of the working loads towards sets of 6 reps by the end of the year, provided that the technique is conducive to this happening. Along with this, the speed and agility work increases in structure, complexity, and intensity.

Training “all things, all the time” means providing stimuli for strength, power, speed, & agility. Share on X

The eccentric elements in the training follow suit. But, again, it progresses gradually as outlined in the diagram below, paying particular attention to any growth-related issues/changes in the way the athlete moves.

 

As in the Foundation phase, our first progression in the eccentric loading is to introduce time under tension, but under load in the general strength exercises. Then we increase the height of the altitude landings while challenging the athletes to increase the stiffness in landing by reducing the amount they yield at the ankle, knee, and hip on impact.

Throughout this process we sometimes re-visit the lower altitude landings, particularly if an athlete has grown considerably. This is because the changes in limb length can lead to changes in mechanics and their ability to execute the movements correctly.

The actual jump training within this phase moves on from controlling landings to repeating jumping, leaping, and hopping tasks, provided everything looks good in terms of control and stability.

The athletes are challenged here to control and absorb landings over greater heights and distances, and also to repeat them in a sequence (e.g., repeated broad jumps). In most cases, these would be classified as slow SSC jumps (>250ms).

The next stage is to introduce higher intensity plyometrics that incorporate things such as pogo jumps and low depth jumps that emphasize shorter ground contact times and aim to develop stiffness.

This year, when the athletes display competency in these progressions and a good level of relative strength in the general strength exercises, we’ve been introducing them to the Exxentric kBox3. It allows us to safely and effectively increase the eccentric overload with these athletes, working in a group environment that would not be logistically possible with traditional eccentric overload methods.

What is the Exxentric kBox3 flywheel training system?

For those that haven’t used the kBox3, it’s an iso-inertial flywheel training system that allows a wide spectrum of loading based on the fact it is dependent on the athlete/user driving the flywheel. In addition, you can increase or decrease the number of flywheels to get more of a strength or power stimulus respectively.

So, rather than working against gravity acting on a loaded barbell or similar implement, you are working against the inertia of the flywheel. The stronger you are or the harder you work, the more force you put into the flywheel and then the more it gives you back when the flywheel reverses and starts pulling you back down. But you can vary the way in which you decelerate the flywheel to create different types of eccentric overload.

Flywheel Training and the Younger Athlete

Thus far, we’ve cautiously introduced the kBox3 with only some of our athletes on the EPP. The athletes we’ve used it with all have met the following criteria:

1. Excellent technique in basic strength exercises.
2. Solid training history of 2+ years and aged 15-16.
3. Good level of relative strength for their age in traditional barbell training (>1.0 x BW).
4. Frequent exposure to eccentric loading in the form of jumping and landing.

The main exercises we’ve been using are squats, quarter squats (feet in a jump position), and lateral squats. The athlete executes them sub-maximally to begin with (i.e., the athlete only pushing with 70-80% effort), and then works to gradually absorb that force through the eccentric phase. From there, we have gradually increased the force they put into the flywheel in the concentric phase along with the speed at which they stop the flywheel in the eccentric phase.

At this point, the volume of work has been low. Typically, there are 2-3 sets of 3-5 repetitions of a single exercise integrated with the normal training program of speed, power, and strength.

Using the kMeter

When we combine the kBox3 with the kMeter, we are also able to gain more insight into the athlete’s concentric and eccentric power-producing capabilities. Specifically, we can identify athletes who can and cannot create an eccentric overload using a standardized 5RM squat test. The two-kMeter readings below are from two different athletes. The light brown bars on the graph indicate concentric peak power and the dark brown bars indicate eccentric peak power. We should typically see an eccentric overload of at least 15%.

You can see on the left that Athlete A struggles to create an eccentric overload on the kBox (eccentric overload = -10%), whereas Athlete B regularly creates an eccentric overload here of 15%. At times it’s even closer to 25% for this particular athlete.

 

The data from the kMeter allows us to create a better picture of what we see when they are jumping on our jump mat. Both athletes jump a similar height of ~40cm on a no-arm depth jump from a 12” box, but Athlete A is really slow off the ground. He takes ~350-450ms to get this height, while Athlete B consistently produces the jump in under 200ms.

This ability to identify the concentric to eccentric deficit has allowed us to better select our training methods for the next phases of Athlete A’s training program, incorporating a higher volume of kBox3 and plyometric work. I don’t have the data yet, but I am really interested to see how the eccentric overload figures change for Athlete A in response to this kBox and plyometric training intervention that we’ve put in place recently.

Summary: Eccentric Training Methods Need to Be Appropriate

In summary, eccentric training is not exclusively for elite athletes. However, the methods that we select need to be appropriate to the athlete and their level of training. This starts with lower eccentric loads introduced through basic jumping and landing tasks once movement competency in basic movements is established. Following this, we can gradually increase the intensity of the eccentric overloads—keeping an eye on movement quality as the young athlete grows and matures. A tool such as the kBox3 can make eccentric overload training safer and more accessible than traditional methods, but it is prudent to be selective in its application to begin with by keeping the volume relatively low.

In addition to the methods employed, we need to consider how we design our sessions to enhance motivation and engagement for the younger athletes. Parkour/Free Running and Gymnastics are great activities to develop movement skills like jumping and landing in a more random, engaging, and challenging manner.

Hopefully, by engaging athletes we can keep them training long enough that we get to the point where we have to “put the icing on the cake.” This includes the most advanced eccentric strength and power methods, which allow them to achieve our ultimate goal and reach their full athletic potential.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

 

Remember when it was cool to insult CrossFit? Admittedly, I was a major perpetrator of crimes against the early incarnation of this fitness phenomenon.

Six or seven years ago, while training in Austin, Texas, for the summer as a mediocre and proud master’s sprinter, I would spot devotees from the CrossFit box down the street, heading to the track at Austin High to crush their WOD. I recall their workout often being a series of rounded-back tire flips, then a dodgy pull-up variation, followed by a few medium-paced 400s run with questionable posture and minimal rest.

Fast-forward to 2016, and CrossFit has come far from simply a military-influenced workout system populated exclusively by devotees who pepper their sentences with “bro” and “elite.”

The CrossFit phenomenon cuts across age and gender, and has adopted a more mature and inclusive philosophy over time. You’ve got to give credit where credit is due: In the general population fitness universe, CrossFit leaders correctly railed against the prevailing 45-minutes-on-the-treadmill-reading-InTouch-magazine crowd. They understood that the intensity of exercise trumps its duration. CrossFit put the “work” back in workout.

Kelly Starrett Emerges as a Posture-Improving, Self-Therapy Advocate

Still, the reality is that every maturing workout philosophy needs a thought leader to move it through early times. For CrossFit, Kelly Starrett emerged as that thought leader. His influence has spread far beyond the CrossFit universe.

I met Starrett at ALTIS during their apprentice program in November 2014, and his surprise visit was met with respect and more than a little excitement. (Throws coach Nick Scheuerman might have even fanboyed a little.) I remember him calling me out on my crappy tall-guy posture within two minutes of arriving. Kelly Starrett is definitely a straight shooter.

A former member of the U.S. Canoe and Kayak team and a DPT by trade, Starrett is the owner of San Francisco CrossFit, one of the earliest franchises. He has become a one-man posture-improving, self-therapy, advocating machine.

He has written two bestselling books, Becoming a Supple Leopard and Ready to Run, and both are fantastic. In addition to their high quality artwork, they feature sound and incredibly creative approaches to mobility restoration and self-therapy that put control of one’s body firmly back in the hands of the athlete.

Many of the principles contained in Becoming a Supple Leopard were introduced to athletes in our winter Florida training camp last season. The effects were amazing, and literally transformed each athlete’s approach to self-care.

Sitting Is the New Smoking

Starrett’s new book takes his previous ideas a step further. In Deskbound: Standing Up to a Sitting World, he makes a convincing argument that the lowly chair is doing much more damage than the cigarette. In the book, he also asks a very important question: What are your athletes doing the other 23 hours per day when they aren’t training? For many of them, the answer is sitting—for up 14 hours.

In his new book, Starrett convincingly argues that sitting is worse for our health than smoking. Share on X

To combat this epidemic, Starrett creates simple prescriptions that, when followed, aspire to improve virtually any athlete’s postural competence.

I “sat down” with Kelly Starrett via Skype (or, more accurately, he squatted and I sat cross-legged with my core properly braced), and we dove deep into a number of topics surrounding our current “sitting culture.” This was in anticipation of his truly entertaining presentation for World Speed Summit, the upcoming free online speed and power conference.

The Four Key Prescriptions to Counteract Postural Damage Caused by Sitting

We delved into the four key prescriptions of Deskbound, and it was fascinating for me to have a window into the mind of a thought leader in the human performance world.

1. Reduce Optional Sitting in Your Life

When you show up to practice after a night of Netflix ’n chill, it is basically the postural equivalent to showing up to train in jeans and flip-flops.

When athletes treat non-training time as something separate and disconnected from their workouts, Starrett asserts that they are basically showing up totally unprepared to train. “One of the problems is, in that short chunk of training time, we have a lot to get done. We have to warm up and cool down and talk about skills and get you more explosive, improve your athleticism, and redress your dysfunction.” Reducing optional sitting and holding the athlete accountable for their posture in everyday life allows them to train at a higher level.

2. For Every 30 Minutes You Are Deskbound, Move for Two Minutes

If you happen to be in a situation where you’re forced to sit, make a conscious decision to move. In spite of all of the best efforts of some very influential people, “we have not budged the childhood obesity epidemic.” There is still a huge problem with caloric intake and the quality of food, but what is also clear is that kids are moving much less than in past generations.

While places like Oregon have compensated by increasing the amount of physical education in schools, Starrett argues that the exact same caloric burn could be achieved passively by simply changing the type of desks in classrooms. Starrett asserts, “You can meet all [those] activity goals with a standing desk.” Early evidence suggests a 25-30% increase in daily calorie burn when students work from a standing base.

3. Optimize Position and Mechanics Whenever You Can

People ignore the fact that posture is a skill that needs to be practiced. “Posture is just a Latin word for position. Can you imagine bragging about bad position, or bad biomechanics?” asks Starrett.

“Across socioeconomic groups, kids 8-18 are spending up to 7 1/2 hours per day on [a] screen. We’re making the physiology match the technology instead of having the technology match the physiology.” Athletes need to actively resist this march in the wrong direction.

4. Perform 10 to 15 Minutes of Daily Maintenance on Your Body

Over time, therapy has somehow become something that people think only a therapist can do. According to Starrett: “Dan Pfaff has been such an important piece of this conversation. Take the unskilled care and move it beyond the paywall of for-profit medicine. In the past 20 years, we’ve put it all on the other side and divorced it from the strength and conditioning process.” Athletes should be able to manage their own muscle tone, and a corresponding increase in mindfulness around their body status will be the norm, not the exception.

Watch Starrett’s Online Presentation at the World Speed Summit Next Week

There is, of course, far more to Kelly Starrett’s Deskbound than the four core principles above, and his World Speed Summit presentation delves into a variety of areas that are deeply connected to the training of speed athletes. There are a number of great takeaways—including a simple yet ingenious way of using the very controversial Training Mask!

Spending an hour listening to Starrett present allows a window into the mind of one of the most influential thinkers in human performance today. In addition to Starrett, they’ll be presentations from more than a dozen other experts. I hope you check it out: The World Speed Summit is FREE to watch at this link starting June 27th.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF